Safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Soo Kyung Son, Na Rae Lee, Seok Ho Kang, Seon Heui Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) in bladder cancer. Methods: A literature search for the systematic review was conducted using international databases as well as domestic databases up to April 2015. Outcomes of interest included baseline characteristics, complication rates, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes. Results: Twenty-four articles were finally selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Complication rates of RARC were similar to those of ORC, except for 90-day overall complication rate, wound dehiscence, abscess, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and sepsis, which was lower after RARC. RARC was also associated with a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield, whereas ORC was associated with a shorter operation time and lower rate of stricture. Considering oncologic outcomes, there were no differences between RARC and ORC. Conclusions: RARC seems to be associated with equivalent complication rates, a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size and comparative studies with long-term follow-up data are warranted to assess our findings and the oncologic effectiveness of RARC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1109-1120
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques
Volume27
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Nov 1

Fingerprint

Cystectomy
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
Meta-Analysis
Safety
Length of Stay
Flatulence
Lymph Nodes
Databases
Respiratory Insufficiency
Sample Size
Abscess
Sepsis
Pneumonia
Pathologic Constriction
Randomized Controlled Trials

Keywords

  • Bladder cancer
  • Cystectomy
  • Robotics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer : A systematic review and meta-analysis. / Son, Soo Kyung; Lee, Na Rae; Kang, Seok Ho; Lee, Seon Heui.

In: Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques, Vol. 27, No. 11, 01.11.2017, p. 1109-1120.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{dcf8ff3a1dbe4ed79d91b73568f29345,
title = "Safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) in bladder cancer. Methods: A literature search for the systematic review was conducted using international databases as well as domestic databases up to April 2015. Outcomes of interest included baseline characteristics, complication rates, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes. Results: Twenty-four articles were finally selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Complication rates of RARC were similar to those of ORC, except for 90-day overall complication rate, wound dehiscence, abscess, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and sepsis, which was lower after RARC. RARC was also associated with a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield, whereas ORC was associated with a shorter operation time and lower rate of stricture. Considering oncologic outcomes, there were no differences between RARC and ORC. Conclusions: RARC seems to be associated with equivalent complication rates, a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size and comparative studies with long-term follow-up data are warranted to assess our findings and the oncologic effectiveness of RARC.",
keywords = "Bladder cancer, Cystectomy, Robotics",
author = "Son, {Soo Kyung} and Lee, {Na Rae} and Kang, {Seok Ho} and Lee, {Seon Heui}",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/lap.2016.0437",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "1109--1120",
journal = "Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A",
issn = "1092-6429",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Son, Soo Kyung

AU - Lee, Na Rae

AU - Kang, Seok Ho

AU - Lee, Seon Heui

PY - 2017/11/1

Y1 - 2017/11/1

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) in bladder cancer. Methods: A literature search for the systematic review was conducted using international databases as well as domestic databases up to April 2015. Outcomes of interest included baseline characteristics, complication rates, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes. Results: Twenty-four articles were finally selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Complication rates of RARC were similar to those of ORC, except for 90-day overall complication rate, wound dehiscence, abscess, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and sepsis, which was lower after RARC. RARC was also associated with a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield, whereas ORC was associated with a shorter operation time and lower rate of stricture. Considering oncologic outcomes, there were no differences between RARC and ORC. Conclusions: RARC seems to be associated with equivalent complication rates, a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size and comparative studies with long-term follow-up data are warranted to assess our findings and the oncologic effectiveness of RARC.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) in bladder cancer. Methods: A literature search for the systematic review was conducted using international databases as well as domestic databases up to April 2015. Outcomes of interest included baseline characteristics, complication rates, perioperative, and oncologic outcomes. Results: Twenty-four articles were finally selected for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Complication rates of RARC were similar to those of ORC, except for 90-day overall complication rate, wound dehiscence, abscess, pneumonia, respiratory failure, and sepsis, which was lower after RARC. RARC was also associated with a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield, whereas ORC was associated with a shorter operation time and lower rate of stricture. Considering oncologic outcomes, there were no differences between RARC and ORC. Conclusions: RARC seems to be associated with equivalent complication rates, a smaller amount of estimated blood loss, lower transfusion rate, shorter length of hospital stay, shorter time to flatus, and more lymph node yield. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size and comparative studies with long-term follow-up data are warranted to assess our findings and the oncologic effectiveness of RARC.

KW - Bladder cancer

KW - Cystectomy

KW - Robotics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033804740&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033804740&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/lap.2016.0437

DO - 10.1089/lap.2016.0437

M3 - Article

C2 - 28350238

AN - SCOPUS:85033804740

VL - 27

SP - 1109

EP - 1120

JO - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

JF - Journal of Laparoendoscopic and Advanced Surgical Techniques - Part A

SN - 1092-6429

IS - 11

ER -