Dataset Information

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is the malignant transformation of urothelial cells, from the renal calyces to the ureteral orifices. While the benefits of minimally invasive nephroureterectomy over their open counterpart have been established, the optimal technique remains a debate. We aimed to assess current evidence in the literature and compare outcomes between robotic-assisted (RANU) and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU).

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was performed for studies comparing RANU and LNU for bladder cancer. Outcome measurements were recurrence rates (local and distal), positive margins, positive lymph node yield and perioperative outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.

Results

Our results demonstrate a significantly higher mortality rate in patients undergoing laparoscopic nephroureterectomy when compared with the robotic-assisted approach for the treatment of UTUC (1.8% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.008); however, these results were inconsistent on sensitivity analysis and should therefore be interpreted with caution. No significant difference was observed for other outcomes.

Conclusion

The ideal approach to minimally invasive radical nephroureterectomy remains undetermined. Future research, ideally prospective randomised studies, should focus on long-term outcomes, in particular recurrence, recurrence-free survival, overall survival and the correlation between surgical technique and survival.

SUBMITTER: O'Sullivan NJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10071076 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

O'Sullivan Niall J NJ Naughton Ailish A Temperley Hugo C HC Casey Rowan G RG

BJUI compass 20230122 3

<h4>Background</h4>Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is the malignant transformation of urothelial cells, from the renal calyces to the ureteral orifices. While the benefits of minimally invasive nephroureterectomy over their open counterpart have been established, the optimal technique remains a debate. We aimed to assess current evidence in the literature and compare outcomes between robotic-assisted (RANU) and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU).<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review of ...[more]

PMID: 37025468

Similar Datasets

Project description:Surgical resection is crucial for curative treatment of rectal cancer. Through multidisciplinary treatment, including radiochemotherapy and total mesorectal excision, survival has improved substantially. Consequently, more patients have to deal with side effects of treatment. The most recently introduced surgical technique is robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) which seems equally effective in terms of oncological control compared to laparoscopy. However, RAS enables further advantages which maximize the precision of surgery, thus providing better functional outcomes such as sexual function or contience without compromising oncological results. This review was done according to the PRISMA and AMSTAR-II guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018104519). The search was planned with PICO criteria and conducted on Medline, Web of Science and CENTRAL. All screening steps were performed by two independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria were original, comparative studies for laparoscopy vs. RAS for rectal cancer and reporting of functional outcomes. Quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The search retrieved 9703 hits, of which 51 studies with 24,319 patients were included. There was a lower rate of urinary retention (non-RCTs: Odds ratio (OR) [95% Confidence Interval (CI)] 0.65 [0.46, 0.92]; RCTs: OR[CI] 1.29[0.08, 21.47]), ileus (non-RCTs: OR[CI] 0.86[0.75, 0.98]; RCTs: OR[CI] 0.80[0.33, 1.93]), less urinary symptoms (non-RCTs mean difference (MD) [CI] - 0.60 [- 1.17, - 0.03]; RCTs: - 1.37 [- 4.18, 1.44]), and higher quality of life for RAS (only non-RCTs: MD[CI]: 2.99 [2.02, 3.95]). No significant differences were found for sexual function (non-RCTs: standardized MD[CI]: 0.46[- 0.13, 1.04]; RCTs: SMD[CI]: 0.09[- 0.14, 0.31]). The current meta-analysis suggests potential benefits for RAS over laparoscopy in terms of functional outcomes after rectal cancer resection. The current evidence is limited due to non-randomized controlled trials and reporting of functional outcomes as secondary endpoints.

Project description:Introduction and aimsThe optimal approach for nephroureterectomy in patients with suspected UTUC remains a point of debate. In this review, we compare the oncological outcomes of robotic nephroureterectomy (RNU) with open (ONU) or laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU).MethodsAll randomized trials and observational studies comparing RNU with ONU and/or LNU for suspected non-metastatic UTUC are included in this review. The systematic review was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), disease-free survival (DFS), and intravesical recurrence-free survival (IV-RFS). The secondary outcome measures were the lymph node dissection (LND) rates, positive margin rates, and the proportion of patients receiving bladder intravesical chemotherapy.ResultsWe identified 8172 references through our electronic searches and 8 studies through manual searching. A total of 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. The total number of patients in the review was 18,964. RNU had superior OS compared to LNU (HR: 0.81 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.93), p-0.002 (very low certainty)). RNU and ONU had similar OS (HR: 0.83 (95% CI: 0.52, 1.34), p-0.44 (very low certainty)). One study reported an independent association of RNU as a worse predictor of IV-RFS when compared to ONU (HR-1.73 (95% CI: 1.22, 2.45)). The LND rates were higher in the RNU cohort when compared to the LNU cohort (RR 1.24 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.51), p-0.03 (low certainty)). The positive margin rate was lower in the RNU cohort when compared to the ONU cohort (RR 0.29 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.86), p-0.03 (low certainty)).ConclusionRNU offers comparable oncological efficacy to ONU, except for intravesical recurrence-free survival (IV-RFS). RNU has fewer positive surgical margin rates compared to ONU in well-balanced studies. RNU appears to outperform LNU for certain oncological parameters, such as OS and the proportion of patients who receive lymph node dissections. The quality of evidence comparing surgical techniques for UTUC has remained poor in the last decade.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To date, robotic surgery has been widely used worldwide. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate short-term and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) in gastric cancer patients to determine whether RG can replace laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). METHODS:The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was applied to perform the study. Pubmed, Cochrane Library, WanFang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and VIP databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before May 2020 that compared RG with LG. Next, two independent reviewers conducted literature screening and data extraction. The quality of the literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Random effects or fixed effects models were applied according to heterogeneity. RESULTS:A total of 19 studies including 7275 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 4598 patients were in the LG group and 2677 in the RG group. Compared with LG, RG was associated with longer operative time (WMD = -32.96, 95% CI -42.08 ~ -23.84, P < 0.001), less blood loss (WMD = 28.66, 95% CI 18.59 ~ 38.73, P < 0.001), and shorter time to first flatus (WMD = 0.16 95% CI 0.06 ~ 0.27, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference between RG and LG in terms of the hospital stay (WMD = 0.23, 95% CI -0.53 ~ 0.98, P = 0.560), overall postoperative complication (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 ~ 1.25, P = 0.430), mortality (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.24 ~ 1.90, P = 0.450), the number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD = -0.96, 95% CI -2.12 ~ 0.20, P = 0.100), proximal resection margin (WMD = -0.10, 95% CI -0.29 ~ 0.09, P = 0.300), and distal resection margin (WMD = 0.15, 95% CI -0.21 ~ 0.52, P = 0.410). No significant differences were found between the two treatments in overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 ~ 1.18, P = 0.640), recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 ~ 1.21, P = 0.530), and recurrence rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 ~ 1.21, P = 0.500). CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study suggested that RG is as acceptable as LG in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. RG can be performed as effectively and safely as LG. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of the robotic surgery for gastric cancer.

Project description:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic vs laparoscopic hysterectomy in women with benign uterine disease, as determined by randomized studies. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Controlled-Trials.com from study inception to October 9, 2014, using the intersection of the themes "robotic" and "hysterectomy." We included only randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of robotic vs laparoscopic hysterectomy in women for benign disease. Four trials met our inclusion criteria and were included in the analyses. We extracted data, and assessed the studies for methodological quality in duplicate. For meta-analysis, we used random effects to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and weighted mean differences. For our primary outcome, we used a modified version of the Expanded Accordion Severity Grading System to classify perioperative complications. We identified 41 complications among 326 patients. Comparing robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy, revealed no statistically significant differences in the rate of class 1 and 2 complications (RR, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23-1.89) or in the rate of class 3 and 4 complications (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.22-4.40). Analyses of secondary outcomes were limited owing to heterogeneity, but showed no significant benefit of the robotic technique over the laparoscopic technique in terms of length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference, -0.39 day; 95% CI, -0.92 to 0.14 day), total operating time (weighted mean difference, 9.0 minutes; 95% CI, -31.27 to 47.26 minutes), conversions to laparotomy, or blood loss. Outcomes of cost, pain, and quality of life were reported inconsistently and were not amenable to pooling. Current evidence demonstrates neither statistically significant nor clinically meaningful differences in surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease. The role of robotic surgery in benign gynecology remains unclear.

Dataset Information

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets