Minimally invasive versus open radical cystectomy: long term oncologic outcomes compared.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mistretta FA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7354333 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Minimally invasive versus open radical cystectomy: long term oncologic outcomes compared.
Mistretta Francesco A FA Luzzago Stefano S Musi Gennaro G de Cobelli Ottavio O
Translational andrology and urology 20200601 3
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7807373 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of the minimally invasive approach on spending and perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. In a randomized control trial conducted at high-volume centers, robotic, and open cystectomy were shown to have similar outcomes. However, because the majority of cystectomies are performed in low-volume centers, it is unknown whether these findings are broadly generalizable.Materials and methodsWe identified Medicare patients who underwent radical cystectomy for bladder cancer between 2008 and 2015. We examined the length of stay, readmission rate, and 90-day spending after minimally invasive or open cystectomy. We used multiple regressions to estimate the association between minimally invasive surgery and the outcomes, accounting for patient, hospital, and surgeon factors that may influence these outcomes.ResultsOf 4760 patients, 693 (14.6%) underwent minimally invasive cystectomy and 4067 (85.4%) had an open approach. Minimally invasive cystectomy was associated with shorter length of stay (10.1 days vs 11.9 days, P <.001), but no difference in readmission rate (27.4% vs 26.8%, P = .77). Minimally invasive cystectomy was associated with lower adjusted 90-day episode spending ($34,369 vs $38,071, P <.001).ConclusionIn patients across diverse institutions in the United States, minimally invasive cystectomy was associated with a shorter length of stay than open cystectomy and reduced 90-day episode spending, but with no significant difference in readmission rate.
| S-EPMC6389393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is a surgical technique intended to avoid abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients diagnosed with low-lying rectal cancer. However, the oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive ISR are still controversial. We analyzed the long-term oncologic outcomes of open and minimally invasive ISR. A total of 313 rectal cancer patients who underwent ISR between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed, including 147 in the open surgery group and 166 in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group. This study also analyzed 113 patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for advanced lower rectal cancer. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences between the two groups. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was the primary end point. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MIS group (9.6 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001). Differences in overall postoperative morbidity rates between the groups were not significant; however, the rate of surgical site infection was significantly lower in the MIS group (1.2 vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001). The 5-year DFS associated with all stages combined in the matched patients were not significantly different: 75.2% in the open group vs. 64.2% in the MIS group (p = 0.214). Similar results were found in matched patients treated with nCRT, with 72.0% in the open group and 61.3% in the MIS group (p = 0.078) showing DFS. Both minimally-invasive and open ISR for rectal cancer yielded similar 5-year oncologic outcomes. MIS showed statistically significant advantages in some postoperative outcomes such as reduced surgical site infection and shorter hospital stay, and similar long-term outcomes compared with open ISR. This study also suggests that MIS after nCRT for advanced rectal cancer represents a surgical option with similar oncological results.
| S-EPMC8155052 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo understand the long-term oncologic outcomes of open radical cystectomy (ORC) versus laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) versus robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for bladder cancer (BCa). Therefore, we performed the conventional meta-analysis and network meta-analysis to evaluate the long-term oncologic outcomes of ORC, LRC, and RARC for BCa.MethodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of science was performed up until July 1, 2021. Long-term oncologic outcomes include the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate, the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate, and the 5-year cancer specific-survival (CSS) rate. The Bayesian network analysis has been registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020208396).ResultsWe found that 10 articles (including 3228 patients) were included in our Bayesian network analysis. No significant differences were found between ORC, LRC, and RARC in long-term oncologic outcomes in either direct meta-analysis or network meta-analysis. Therefore, the clinical effects of 5-year OS, RFS, and CSS of RARC, LRC, and ORC are similar. But LRC may be ranked first in 5-year OS, RFS, and CSS compared to other surgical approaches by probabilistic analysis ranking via Bayesian network analysis.ConclusionWe found that there were no statistical differences in the 3 surgical approaches of RAPC, LPC, and OPC for Bca in long-term oncologic outcomes by direct meta-analysis. However, Subtle differences between these surgical approaches can be concluded that LRC may be a better surgical approach than RARC or ORC in long-term oncologic outcomes by probabilistic analysis ranking via Bayesian network analysis. Moreover, we need a large sample size and more high-quality studies to improve and verify further.
| S-EPMC9410639 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7807372 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6918880 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe application of pelvic organ preserving-radical cystectomy (POPRC) in female patients with bladder cancer has attracted more and more attention in recent years. In current study, we aim to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of pelvic organ preserving-radical cystectomy (POPRC) versus standard radical cystectomy (SRC) in a large multicenter retrospective cohort.Patients and methodsData on female patients with bladder cancer who underwent POPRC or SRC in January 2006 and April 2018 were included from three Chinese urological centers. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were cancer-specific survival (CSS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). To decrease the effect of unmeasured confounders associated with treatment selection, 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed.ResultsAmong 273 enrolled patients, 158 underwent POPRC (57.9%), and 115 underwent SRC (42.1%). The median follow-up time was 38.6 (15.9-62.5) months. After PSM, each cohort included 99 matched patients. The OS (P=0.940), CSS (P=0.957), and RFS (P=0.476) did not differ significantly from the two matched cohorts. Subgroup analysis confirmed that the OS was similar between the patients treated with POPRC and SRC across all subgroups examined (all P > 0.05). In multivariable analysis, the surgical method (SRC vs. POPRC) was not an independent risk factor for OS (HR 0.874, 95% CI 0.592-1.290; P=0.498).ConclusionsThe results showed that no significant difference in long-term survival was determined between female patients undergoing SRC and those undergoing POPRC.
| S-EPMC10498867 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8317860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radical cystectomy (RC) is the gold standard treatment for muscle-invasive and high-risk, noninvasive bladder cancer. Since 2003, robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has been gaining popularity. Metanalyses show that the primary advantage of RARC is less blood loss and the primary advantage of open radical cystectomy (ORC) is shorter operative times. There do not appear to be significant differences in complications, cancer-related outcomes or survival between the two approaches. Cost analyses comparing RARC and ORC are complicated by the often-ill-defined distinction between the cost to the hospital versus the cost to payors. However, it is likely that for both hospitals and payors, RARC is cost effective at high-volume centers. It is feasible that in the future, increased experience with RARC will lead to improved outcomes and justify the use of RARC over ORC.
| S-EPMC8185680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of the study was to perform a systematic assessment of disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival, and morbidity rates after open radical hysterectomy (ORH) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for early-stage cervical cancer and discuss with experts the consequences of the LACC trial (published by Ramirez et al. in 2018) on clinical routine. A total of 5428 records were retrieved. After exclusion based on text screening, four records were identified for inclusion. Five experts from three independent large-volume medical centers in Europe were interviewed for their interpretation of the LACC trial. The LACC trial showed a significantly higher risk of disease progression with MIS compared to ORH (HR 3.74, 95% CI 1.63 to 8.58). This was not seen in one epidemiological study and was contradicted by one prospective cohort study reported by Greggi et al. A systematic review by Zhang et al. mentioned a similar DFS for robot-assisted radical hysterectomy (RRH) and LRH. Recurrence rates were significantly higher with MIS compared to ORH in the LACC trial (HR 4.26, 95% CI 1.44 to 12.60). In contrast, four studies presented by Greggi reported no significant difference in recurrence rates between LRH/RRH and ORH, which concurred with the systematic reviews of Zhang and Zhao. The experts mentioned various limitations of the LACC trial and stated that clinicians were obliged to provide patients with detailed information and ensure a shared decision-making process. The surgical treatment of early-stage cervical cancer remains a debated issue. More randomized controlled trials (RCT) will be needed to establish the most suitable treatment for this condition.
| S-EPMC8432133 | biostudies-literature