Robotic assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy: a review of what we do and don't know.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gul ZG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8185680 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo critically review the currently available evidence of studies comparing robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open radical cystectomy (ORC).MethodsA comprehensive review of the literature from Pubmed, Web of Science and Scopus was performed in April 2014. All relevant studies comparing RARC with ORC were included for further screening. A pooled meta-analysis of all comparative studies was performed and publication bias was assessed by a funnel plot.ResultsNineteen studies were included for the analysis, including a total of 1779 patients (787 patients in the RARC group and 992 patients in the ORC group). Although RARC was associated with longer operative time (p <0.0001), patients in this group might benefit from significantly lower overall perioperative complication rates within 30 days and 90 days (p = 0.005 and 0.0002, respectively), more lymph node yields (p = 0.009), less estimated blood loss (p <0.00001), lower need for perioperative and intraoperative transfusions (p <0.0001 and <0.0001, respectively), and shorter postoperative length of stay (p = 0.0002). There was no difference between two groups regarding positive surgical margin rates (p = 0.19).ConclusionsRARC appears to be an efficient alternative to ORC with advantages of less perioperative complications, more lymph node yields, less estimated blood loss, lower need for transfusions, and shorter postoperative length of stay. Further studies should be performed to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes between RARC and ORC.
| S-EPMC4380496 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8317860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Italian Radical Cystectomy Registry (Registro Italiano Cistectomie - RIC) aimed to analyse outcomes of a multicenter series of patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer.Material and methodsAn observational, prospective, multicenter, cohort study was performed to collect data from RC and urinary diversion via open (ORC), laparoscopic (LRC), or robotic-assisted (RARC) techniques performed in 28 Italian Urological Departments. The enrolment was planned from January 2017 to June 2020 (goal: 1000 patients), with a total of 1425 patients included. Chi-square and t-tests were used for categorical and continuous variables. All tests were 2-sided, with a significance level set at p <0.05.ResultsOverall median operative-time was longer in RARCs (390 minutes, IQR 335-465) than ORCs (250, 217-309) and LRCs (292, 228-350) (p <0.001). Lymph node dissection (LND) was performed more frequently in RARCs (97.1%) and LRCs (93.5%) than ORCs (85.6%) (p <0.001), with extended-LND performed 2-fold more frequently in RARCs (61.6%) (p <0.001). The neobladder rate was significantly higher (more than one-half) in RARCs. The median estimated blood loss (EBL) rate was lower in RARCs (250 ml, 165-400) than LRCs (330, 200-600) and ORCs (400, 250-600) (p <0.001), with intraoperative blood transfusion rates of 11.4%, 21.7% and 35.6%, respectively (p <0.001). The conversion to open rate was slightly higher in RARCs (6.8%) than LRCs (4.3%). Intraoperative complications occurred in 1.3% of cases without statistically significant differences among the approaches.ConclusionsData from the RIC confirmed the need to collect as much data as possible in a multicenter manner. RARCs proves to be feasible with perioperative complication rates that do not differ from the other approaches.
| S-EPMC9326698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) procedures is increasing despite the lack of Level I evidence showing any advantages over open radical cystectomy (ORC). However, several systematic reviews with meta-analyses including non-randomised studies, suggest an overall benefit for RARC compared to ORC. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the perioperative morbidity and efficacy of RARC compared to ORC in patients with bladder cancer.MethodsLiterature searches of Medline/Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and clinicaltrials.gov databases up to 10th March 2016 were performed. The inclusion criteria for eligible studies were RCTs which compared perioperative outcomes of ORC and RARC for bladder cancer. Primary objective was perioperative and histopathological outcomes of RARC versus ORC while the secondary objective was quality of life assessment (QoL), oncological outcomes and cost analysis.ResultsFour RCTs (from 5 articles) met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 239 patients all with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics of RARC and ORC patients were evenly matched. There was no significant difference between groups in perioperative morbidity, length of stay, positive surgical margin, lymph node yield and positive lymph node status. RARC group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (p<0.001) and wound complications (p = 0.03) but required significantly longer operating time (p<0.001). QoL was not measured uniformly across trials and cost analysis was reported in one RCTs. A test for heterogeneity did highlight differences across operating time of trials suggesting that surgeon experience may influence outcomes.ConclusionsThis study does not provide evidence to support a benefit for RARC compared to ORC. These results may not have inference for RARC with intracorporeal urinary diversion. Well-designed trials with appropriate endpoints conducted by equally experienced ORC and RARC surgeons will be needed to address this.
| S-EPMC5098822 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Open radical cystectomy (ORC) has been the standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, but this is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has been proposed as minimally invasive alternative with improved morbidity and acceptable oncological outcomes, but a large series featuring RARC and their comparison with ORC is still lacking in India despite more than a decade of its inception. We have conducted this study with an objective to see the feasibility of RARC in the Indian context and compare it with contemporary standard. Methods:This is a prospective cohort study conducted at two tertiary cancer institutes. We have evaluated the patients pertaining to operative and early post-operative factors from January 2014 to December 2015. Necessary statistical tests applied to see comparability of the arms and their outcomes. Results:A total of 170 patients underwent surgery for carcinoma bladder (45 ORC while 125 RARC). Intraoperative blood loss (RARC and ORC: 228 and 529 ml) and average transfusion rate were lower with RARC. A trend towards benefit was noted in favour of robotic arm in terms of mean complication rate (RARC and ORC: 54 and 39%). Conclusions:The present study has shown comparable surgical and early post-operative outcomes with clear advantage of robotic approach in terms of intraoperative blood transfusion and lymph node yield. Although the study was non-randomised in nature, it should provide substantial evidence on safety and feasibility of RARC in the Indian context and a reference point of evidence to look ahead.
| S-EPMC6130186 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundOpen radical cystectomy (ORC) and urinary diversion in patients with bladder cancer (BCa) are associated with significant perioperative complication risk.ObjectiveTo compare perioperative complications between robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and ORC techniques.Design, setting, and participantsA prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted during 2010 and 2013 in BCa patients scheduled for definitive treatment by radical cystectomy (RC), pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND), and urinary diversion. Patients were randomized to ORC/PLND or RARC/PLND, both with open urinary diversion. Patients were followed for 90 d postoperatively.InterventionStandard ORC or RARC with PLND; all urinary diversions were performed via an open approach.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisPrimary outcomes were overall 90-d grade 2-5 complications defined by a modified Clavien system. Secondary outcomes included comparison of high-grade complications, estimated blood loss, operative time, pathologic outcomes, 3- and 6-mo patient-reported quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes, and total operative room and inpatient costs. Differences in binary outcomes were assessed with the chi-square test, with differences in continuous outcomes assessed by analysis of covariance with randomization group as covariate and, for QOL end points, baseline score.Results and limitationsThe trial enrolled 124 patients, of whom 118 were randomized and underwent RC/PLND. Sixty were randomized to RARC and 58 to ORC. At 90 d, grade 2-5 complications were observed in 62% and 66% of RARC and ORC patients, respectively (95% confidence interval for difference, -21% to -13%; p=0.7). The similar rates of grade 2-5 complications at our mandated interim analysis met futility criteria; thus, early closure of the trial occurred. The RARC group had lower mean intraoperative blood loss (p=0.027) but significantly longer operative time than the ORC group (p<0.001). Pathologic variables including positive surgical margins and lymph node yields were similar. Mean hospital stay was 8 d in both arms (standard deviation, 3 and 5 d, respectively; p=0.5). Three- and 6-mo QOL outcomes were similar between arms. Cost analysis demonstrated an advantage to ORC compared with RARC. A limitation is the setting at a single high-volume, referral center; our findings may not be generalizable to all settings.ConclusionsThis trial failed to identify a large advantage for robot-assisted techniques over standard open surgery for patients undergoing RC/PLND and urinary diversion. Similar 90-d complication rates, hospital stay, pathologic outcomes, and 3- and 6-mo QOL outcomes were observed regardless of surgical technique.Patient summaryOf 118 patients with bladder cancer who underwent radical cystectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection, and urinary diversion, half were randomized to open surgery and half to robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. We compared the rate of complications within 90 d after surgery for the open group versus the robotic group and found no significant difference between the two groups.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01076387, www.clinicaltrials.gov.
| S-EPMC4424172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the fact that the cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is not yet proven, and open radical (ORC) cystectomy is recommended as the standard of care in patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive bladder cancer, the use of RARC is still increasing. The objective of the current ongoing comparative effectiveness trial therefore is to study the (cost-)effectiveness of RARC compared to ORC, both in terms of objective (complication rates, oncological outcomes) and patient-reported (health-related quality of life) outcome measures. METHODS:This study is designed as a non-randomized, multicentre comparative effectiveness trial. Centres with an annual caseload of >?20 radical cystectomies can include patients after informed consent has been given. Centres that perform RARC must have passed the (initial) learning curve of 40 cases. A total of 338 (2?×?169) patients will be enrolled from 23 participating centres (12 ORC, 10 RARC and 1 LRC). Follow-up visits will be scheduled at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. During each follow-up visit, clinical data and health-related quality of life questionnaires will be administered. Costs will be studied using a monthly resource usage questionnaire. Impact on complications and quality of life will be calculated as the average difference between the groups with 95% confidence intervals, adjusted for potential baseline differences by means of propensity score matching. DISCUSSION:This study aims to contribute to the development of evidence-based guidelines regarding the most cost-effective surgical technique for radical cystectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Nederlands Trial Register/Dutch Trial Registry, trial identifying number: NTR5362. Registered on 14 August 2015. ( http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=5362 ).
| S-EPMC6122745 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radical cystectomy is the standard of care for patients with nonmetastatic high-risk bladder cancer. Robotic approach to radical cystectomy has been developed to reduce perioperative morbidities and enhance postoperative recovery while maintaining oncologic control. Classically, radical cystectomy in female patient entails anterior pelvic exenteration with removal of the bladder, uterus, fallopian tubes, ovaries, anterior vaginal wall, and urethra. Pelvic organ-sparing radical cystectomy has been adopted in carefully selected patients to optimize postoperative sexual and urinary function, especially in those undergoing orthotopic urinary diversion. In this article, we describe our techniques of both classical and organ-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy in female patients. We also review patient selection criteria, perioperative management, and alternative approaches to improve operative outcomes in female patients.
| S-EPMC8558089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Bladder cancer (BC) is a common malignancy and one of the most expensive to manage. Radical cystectomy (RC) with pelvic lymphadenectomy is a gold standard treatment for high-risk BC. Reductions in morbidity and mortality from RC may be achieved through robot-assisted RC (RARC). Prospective comparisons between open RC (ORC) and RARC have been limited by sample size, use of extracorporeal reconstruction and use of outcomes important for ORC. Conversely, while RARC is gaining in popularity, there is little evidence to suggest it is superior to ORC. We are undertaking a prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare RARC with intracorporeal reconstruction (iRARC) and ORC using multimodal outcomes to explore qualitative and quantitative recovery after surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: iROC is a multicentre prospective RCT in English National Health Service (NHS) cancer centres. We will randomise 320 patients undergoing RC to either iRARC or ORC. Treatment allocation will occur after trial entry and consent. The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital within the first 90 days from surgery. Secondary outcomes will measure functional recovery (activity trackers, chair-to-stand tests and health related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires), morbidity (complications and readmissions), cost-effectiveness (using EuroQol-5 Domain-5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) and unit costs) and surgeon fatigue. Patients will be analysed according to intention to treat. The primary outcome will be transformed and analysed using regression. All statistical assumptions will be investigated. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using appropriate regression methods. An internal feasibility study of the first 30 patients will evaluate recruitment rates, acceptance of randomised treatment choice, compliance outcome collection and to revise our sample size. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study has ethical approval (REC reference 16/NE/0418). Findings will be made available to patients, clinicians, funders and the NHS through peer-reviewed publications, social media and patient support groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS:ISRCTN13680280 and NCT03049410.
| S-EPMC6089318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe value to payers of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion (iRARC) when compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer is unclear.ObjectivesTo compare the cost-effectiveness of iRARC with that of ORC.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used individual patient data from a randomized clinical trial at 9 surgical centers in the United Kingdom. Patients with nonmetastatic bladder cancer were recruited from March 20, 2017, to January 29, 2020. The analysis used a health service perspective and a 90-day time horizon, with supplementary analyses exploring patient benefits up to 1 year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. Data were analyzed from January 13, 2022, to March 10, 2023.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive either iRARC (n = 169) or ORC (n = 169).Main outcomes and measuresCosts of surgery were calculated using surgery timings and equipment costs, with other hospital data based on counts of activity. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated from European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level instrument responses. Prespecified subgroup analyses were undertaken based on patient characteristics and type of diversion.ResultsA total of 305 patients with available outcome data were included in the analysis, with a mean (SD) age of 68.3 (8.1) years, and of whom 241 (79.0%) were men. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy was associated with statistically significant reductions in admissions to intensive therapy (6.35% [95% CI, 0.42%-12.28%]), and readmissions to hospital (14.56% [95% CI, 5.00%-24.11%]), but increases in theater time (31.35 [95% CI, 13.67-49.02] minutes). The additional cost of iRARC per patient was £1124 (95% CI, -£576 to £2824 [US $1622 (95% CI, -$831 to $4075)]) with an associated gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.01124 (95% CI, 0.00391-0.01857). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £100 008 (US $144 312) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy had a much higher probability of being cost-effective for subgroups defined by age, tumor stage, and performance status.Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation of surgery for patients with bladder cancer, iRARC reduced short-term morbidity and some associated costs. While the resulting cost-effectiveness ratio was in excess of thresholds used by many publicly funded health systems, patient subgroups were identified for which iRARC had a high probability of being cost-effective.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03049410.
| S-EPMC10314306 | biostudies-literature