Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy: A Meta-analysis of Oncologic, Perioperative, and Complication-related outcomes

Raj Satkunasivam, Christopher T. Tallman, Jennifer M. Taylor, Brian J. Miles, Zachary W A Klaassen, Christopher J.D. Wallis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasingly being used to treat muscle-invasive bladder cancer in an attempt to improve functional outcomes and complication rates over open radical cystectomy (ORC). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare patient outcomes between RARC and ORC. The primary outcome measure was a composite of recurrence-free survival (RFS) or progression-free survival (PFS). As a secondary measure, we examined other surrogate oncologic endpoints, perioperative outcomes, and complications. We found no difference between RARC and ORC with respect to RFS/PFS (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.64–1.24), surgical margin rates, or lymph node dissection yield. Analysis of patterns of recurrence for (pelvic) versus distant/abdominal sites indicated a significant difference between RARC and ORC (p = 0.04). This analysis represents a combination of post hoc analyses using RCT data and inconsistent between-study definitions of recurrence sites, and must be interpreted with caution. Lastly, RARC was associated with an advantage in estimated blood loss, but a longer operative time, with no difference in hospital length of stay or complication rates. These data support the oncologic safety of RARC; however, further research is required to assess potential differences in recurrence patterns. Patient summary: We synthesized data from recent randomized controlled trials to examine differences in cancer control between minimally invasive, robot-assisted radical cystectomy and traditional, open radical cystectomy. Our study shows that cancer control outcomes are comparable between robotic and open techniques, supporting the safety of minimally invasive surgery. Blood loss was lower in robotic surgery, but the robotic procedure was longer and did not have lower complications rates after surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)443-447
Number of pages5
JournalEuropean Urology Oncology
Volume2
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2019

Fingerprint

Cystectomy
Meta-Analysis
Robotics
Recurrence
Randomized Controlled Trials
Disease-Free Survival
Length of Stay
Safety
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
Operative Time
Lymph Node Excision
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
Neoplasms
Biomarkers
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Confidence Intervals

Keywords

  • Bladder cancer
  • Meta-analysis
  • Radical cystectomy
  • Randomized controlled trial
  • Robot-assisted radical cystectomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Surgery
  • Oncology
  • Urology

Cite this

Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy : A Meta-analysis of Oncologic, Perioperative, and Complication-related outcomes. / Satkunasivam, Raj; Tallman, Christopher T.; Taylor, Jennifer M.; Miles, Brian J.; Klaassen, Zachary W A; Wallis, Christopher J.D.

In: European Urology Oncology, Vol. 2, No. 4, 01.07.2019, p. 443-447.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Satkunasivam, Raj ; Tallman, Christopher T. ; Taylor, Jennifer M. ; Miles, Brian J. ; Klaassen, Zachary W A ; Wallis, Christopher J.D. / Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy : A Meta-analysis of Oncologic, Perioperative, and Complication-related outcomes. In: European Urology Oncology. 2019 ; Vol. 2, No. 4. pp. 443-447.
@article{d041071a671d46cfacf1a1e94eba64a0,
title = "Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy: A Meta-analysis of Oncologic, Perioperative, and Complication-related outcomes",
abstract = "Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasingly being used to treat muscle-invasive bladder cancer in an attempt to improve functional outcomes and complication rates over open radical cystectomy (ORC). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare patient outcomes between RARC and ORC. The primary outcome measure was a composite of recurrence-free survival (RFS) or progression-free survival (PFS). As a secondary measure, we examined other surrogate oncologic endpoints, perioperative outcomes, and complications. We found no difference between RARC and ORC with respect to RFS/PFS (hazard ratio 0.89, 95{\%} confidence interval 0.64–1.24), surgical margin rates, or lymph node dissection yield. Analysis of patterns of recurrence for (pelvic) versus distant/abdominal sites indicated a significant difference between RARC and ORC (p = 0.04). This analysis represents a combination of post hoc analyses using RCT data and inconsistent between-study definitions of recurrence sites, and must be interpreted with caution. Lastly, RARC was associated with an advantage in estimated blood loss, but a longer operative time, with no difference in hospital length of stay or complication rates. These data support the oncologic safety of RARC; however, further research is required to assess potential differences in recurrence patterns. Patient summary: We synthesized data from recent randomized controlled trials to examine differences in cancer control between minimally invasive, robot-assisted radical cystectomy and traditional, open radical cystectomy. Our study shows that cancer control outcomes are comparable between robotic and open techniques, supporting the safety of minimally invasive surgery. Blood loss was lower in robotic surgery, but the robotic procedure was longer and did not have lower complications rates after surgery.",
keywords = "Bladder cancer, Meta-analysis, Radical cystectomy, Randomized controlled trial, Robot-assisted radical cystectomy",
author = "Raj Satkunasivam and Tallman, {Christopher T.} and Taylor, {Jennifer M.} and Miles, {Brian J.} and Klaassen, {Zachary W A} and Wallis, {Christopher J.D.}",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.euo.2018.10.008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "443--447",
journal = "European urology oncology",
issn = "2588-9311",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy

T2 - A Meta-analysis of Oncologic, Perioperative, and Complication-related outcomes

AU - Satkunasivam, Raj

AU - Tallman, Christopher T.

AU - Taylor, Jennifer M.

AU - Miles, Brian J.

AU - Klaassen, Zachary W A

AU - Wallis, Christopher J.D.

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasingly being used to treat muscle-invasive bladder cancer in an attempt to improve functional outcomes and complication rates over open radical cystectomy (ORC). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare patient outcomes between RARC and ORC. The primary outcome measure was a composite of recurrence-free survival (RFS) or progression-free survival (PFS). As a secondary measure, we examined other surrogate oncologic endpoints, perioperative outcomes, and complications. We found no difference between RARC and ORC with respect to RFS/PFS (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.64–1.24), surgical margin rates, or lymph node dissection yield. Analysis of patterns of recurrence for (pelvic) versus distant/abdominal sites indicated a significant difference between RARC and ORC (p = 0.04). This analysis represents a combination of post hoc analyses using RCT data and inconsistent between-study definitions of recurrence sites, and must be interpreted with caution. Lastly, RARC was associated with an advantage in estimated blood loss, but a longer operative time, with no difference in hospital length of stay or complication rates. These data support the oncologic safety of RARC; however, further research is required to assess potential differences in recurrence patterns. Patient summary: We synthesized data from recent randomized controlled trials to examine differences in cancer control between minimally invasive, robot-assisted radical cystectomy and traditional, open radical cystectomy. Our study shows that cancer control outcomes are comparable between robotic and open techniques, supporting the safety of minimally invasive surgery. Blood loss was lower in robotic surgery, but the robotic procedure was longer and did not have lower complications rates after surgery.

AB - Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is increasingly being used to treat muscle-invasive bladder cancer in an attempt to improve functional outcomes and complication rates over open radical cystectomy (ORC). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare patient outcomes between RARC and ORC. The primary outcome measure was a composite of recurrence-free survival (RFS) or progression-free survival (PFS). As a secondary measure, we examined other surrogate oncologic endpoints, perioperative outcomes, and complications. We found no difference between RARC and ORC with respect to RFS/PFS (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.64–1.24), surgical margin rates, or lymph node dissection yield. Analysis of patterns of recurrence for (pelvic) versus distant/abdominal sites indicated a significant difference between RARC and ORC (p = 0.04). This analysis represents a combination of post hoc analyses using RCT data and inconsistent between-study definitions of recurrence sites, and must be interpreted with caution. Lastly, RARC was associated with an advantage in estimated blood loss, but a longer operative time, with no difference in hospital length of stay or complication rates. These data support the oncologic safety of RARC; however, further research is required to assess potential differences in recurrence patterns. Patient summary: We synthesized data from recent randomized controlled trials to examine differences in cancer control between minimally invasive, robot-assisted radical cystectomy and traditional, open radical cystectomy. Our study shows that cancer control outcomes are comparable between robotic and open techniques, supporting the safety of minimally invasive surgery. Blood loss was lower in robotic surgery, but the robotic procedure was longer and did not have lower complications rates after surgery.

KW - Bladder cancer

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - Radical cystectomy

KW - Randomized controlled trial

KW - Robot-assisted radical cystectomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068186717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068186717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.euo.2018.10.008

DO - 10.1016/j.euo.2018.10.008

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85068186717

VL - 2

SP - 443

EP - 447

JO - European urology oncology

JF - European urology oncology

SN - 2588-9311

IS - 4

ER -