Robotic‐assisted versus open radical cystectomy in bladder cancer: A meta‐analysis of four randomized controlled trails. Issue 1 (12th October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tang, Jin‐Qiu; Zhao, Zhihong; Liang, Yiwen; Liao, Guixiang
• Is Part Of: International journal of medical robotics and computer assisted surgery. Volume 14:Issue 1(2018)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2017-10-12
• Subjects: meta‐analysis -- open radical cystectomy -- randomized controlled trial -- robot‐assisted radical cystectomy; Robotics in medicine -- Periodicals; Surgery -- Technological innovations -- Periodicals; Imaging systems in medicine -- Periodicals; 617.90285
• DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1867
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1478-5951

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Robot‐assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasing annually for treatment of bladder cancer. The objective of this meta‐analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of RARC and open radical cystectomy (ORC) for bladder cancer. Methods: Our meta‐analysis searches were conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing the two techniques. Results: Four RCT studies were identified, including 239 cases. Our studies indicated that RARC was associated with longer operative time (WMD: 69.69, 95% CI:17.25 to122.12; P = 0.009), lower estimated blood loss (WMD: –299.83, 95% CI:–414.66to −184.99; P <0.00001). The two groups had no significant difference in overall perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, lymph node yield and positive surgical margins. Conclusions: RARC is mini‐invasive alternative to ORC for bladder cancer. The advantage of RARC was reduced estimated blood loss. More studies are needed to compare the two techniques.