Robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in adults

被引:97
作者
Rai, Bhavan Prasad [1 ]
Bondad, Jasper [2 ]
Vasdev, Nikhil [3 ]
Adshead, Jim [3 ]
Lane, Tim [3 ]
Ahmed, Kamran [4 ]
Khan, Mohammed S. [4 ]
Dasgupta, Prokar [4 ]
Guru, Khurshid [5 ]
Chlosta, Piotr L. [6 ]
Aboumarzouk, Omar M. [7 ]
机构
[1] Newcastle Upon Tyne Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Freeman Hosp, Dept Urol, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, England
[2] Southend Hosp, Dept Urol, Westcliff On Sea, England
[3] Lister Hosp, Dept Urol, Stevenage, Herts, England
[4] Kings Coll London, Sch Med, MRC Ctr Transplantat, Div Transplantat Immunol & Mucosal Biol, London, England
[5] Roswell Pk Canc Inst, Dept Urol, Buffalo, NY 14263 USA
[6] Jagiellonian Univ, Coll Med, Dept Urol, Krakow, Poland
[7] NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde, Dept Urol, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2019年 / 04期
关键词
INTRACORPOREAL URINARY-DIVERSION; ORTHOTOPIC ILEAL NEOBLADDER; PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES; ONCOLOGIC OUTCOMES; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; QUALITY; METAANALYSIS; MORBIDITY; IMPACT; COHORT;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD011903.pub2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background It has been suggested that in comparison with open radical cystectomy, robotic-assisted radical cystectomy results in less blood loss, shorter convalescence, and fewer complications with equivalent short- term oncological and functional outcomes; however, uncertainty remains as to the magnitude of these benefits. Objectives To assess the effects of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy in adults with bladder cancer. Search methods Review authors conducted a comprehensive search with no restrictions on language of publication or publication status for studies comparing open radical cystectomy and robotic- assisted radical cystectomy. The date of the last search was 1 July 2018 for the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE (1999 to July 2018), PubMed Embase (1999 to July 2018), Web of Science (1999 to July 2018), Cancer Research UK (www. cancerresearchuk. org/), and the Institute of Cancer Research (www. icr. ac. uk/). We searched the following trials registers: ClinicalTrials. gov (clinicaltrials. gov/), BioMed Central International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Number (ISRCTN) Registry (www. isrctn. com), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Selection criteria We searched for randomised controlled trials that compared robotic- assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open radical cystectomy ORC). Data collection and analysis This study was based on a published protocol. Primary outcomes of the review were recurrence-free survival and major postoperative complications (class III to V). Secondary outcomes were minor postoperative complications (class I and II), transfusion requirement, length of hospital stay (days), quality of life, and positive margins (%). Three review authors independently assessed relevant titles and abstracts of records identified by the literature search to determine which studies should be assessed further. Two review authors assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and rated the quality of evidence according to GRADE. We used Review Manager 5 to analyse the data. Main results We included in the review five randomised controlled trials comprising a total of 541 participants. Total numbers of participants included in the ORC and RARC cohorts were 270 and 271, respectively. Primary outomes Time-to-recurrence: Robotic cystectomy and open cystectomy may result in a similar time to recurrence (hazard ratio (HR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.43); 2 trials; low-certainty evidence). In absolute terms at 5 years of follow-up, this corresponds to 16 more recurrences per 1000 participants (95% CI 79 fewer to 123 more) with 431 recurrences per 1000 participants for ORC. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and imprecision. Major complications (Clavien grades 3 to 5): Robotic cystectomy and open cystectomy may result in similar rates of major complications (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.48); 5 trials; low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 11 more major complications per 1000 participants (95% CI 44 fewer to 89 more). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and imprecision. Secondary outcomes Minor complications (Clavien grades 1 and 2): We are very uncertain whether robotic cystectomy may reduce minor complications (very low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and for very serious imprecision. Transfusion rate: Robotic cystectomy probably results in substantially fewer transfusions than open cystectomy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.80; 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 193 fewer transfusions per 1000 participants (95% CI 262 fewer to 92 fewer) based on 460 transfusion per 1000 participants for ORC. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations. Hospital stay: Robotic cystectomy may result in a slightly shorter hospital stay than open cystectomy (mean difference (MD) -0.67, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.12); 5 trials; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and imprecision. Quality of life: Robotic cystectomy and open cystectomy may result in a similar quality of life (standard mean difference (SMD) 0.08, 95% CI 0.32 lower to 0.16 higher; 3 trials; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and imprecision. Positive margin rates: Robotic cystectomy and open cystectomy may result in similar positive margin rates (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.56 to 2.40; 5 trials; low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 8more (95% CI 21 fewer to 67more) positive margins per 1000 participants based on 48 positive margins per 1000 participants for ORC. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for study limitations and imprecision. Authors ' conclusions Robotic cystectomy and open cystectomy may have similar outcomes with regard to time to recurrence, rates of major complications, quality of life, and positive margin rates (all low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether the robotic approach reduces rates of minor complications (very low-certainty evidence), although it probably reduces the risk of blood transfusions substantially (moderate-certainty evidence) and may reduce hospital stay slightly (low-certainty evidence). We were unable to conduct any of the preplanned subgroup analyses to assess the impact of patient age, pathological stage, body habitus, or surgeon expertise on outcomes. This review did not address issues of cost-effectiveness.
引用
收藏
页数:54
相关论文
共 72 条
  • [1] Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy for the Treatment of Bladder Cancer
    Aboumarzouk, Omar M.
    Hughes, Owen
    Narahari, Krishna
    Drewa, Tomasz
    Chlosta, Piotr L.
    Kynaston, Howard
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2013, 27 (09) : 1083 - 1095
  • [2] Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy: a 5-year review of a single institute's operative data and complications and a systematic review of the literature
    Aboumarzouk, Omar M.
    Drewa, Tomasz
    Olejniczak, Pawel
    Chlosta, Piotr L.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2012, 38 (03): : 330 - 340
  • [3] Ureteroenteric Anastomotic Strictures After Radical Cystectomy-Does Operative Approach Matter?
    Anderson, Christopher B.
    Morgan, Todd M.
    Kappa, Stephen
    Moore, David
    Clark, Peter E.
    Davis, Rodney
    Penson, David F.
    Barocas, Daniel A.
    Smith, Joseph A., Jr.
    Cookson, Michael S.
    Chang, Sam S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 189 (02) : 541 - 546
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2015, GRADEpro GDT: GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool Software
  • [5] ATMACA AF, 2015, JSLS, V19, pE2014
  • [6] Complications and oncologic outcomes following robot-assisted radical cystectomy: What is the real benefit?
    Bak, Dong Jae
    Lee, You Jin
    Woo, Myeong Jin
    Chung, Jae-Wook
    Ha, Yun-Sok
    Kim, Hyun Tae
    Kim, Tae-Hwan
    Yoo, Eun Sang
    Kim, Bup Wan
    Kwon, Tae Gyun
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE AND CLINICAL UROLOGY, 2016, 57 (04) : 260 - 267
  • [7] The da Vinci telerobotic surgical system: the virtual operative field and telepresence surgery
    Ballantyne, GH
    Moll, F
    [J]. SURGICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2003, 83 (06) : 1293 - +
  • [8] Comparing Open Radical Cystectomy and Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Bochner, Bernard H.
    Dalbagni, Guido
    Sjoberg, Daniel D.
    Silberstein, Jonathan
    Paz, Gal E. Keren
    Donat, S. Machele
    Coleman, Jonathan A.
    Mathew, Sheila
    Vickers, Andrew
    Schnorr, Geoffrey C.
    Feuerstein, Michael A.
    Rapkin, Bruce
    Parra, Raul O.
    Herr, Harry W.
    Laudone, Vincent P.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 67 (06) : 1042 - 1050
  • [9] No Differences in Population-based Readmissions After Open and Robotic-assisted Radical Cystectomy: Implications for Post-discharge Care
    Borza, Tudor
    Jacobs, Bruce L.
    Montgomery, Jeffrey S.
    Weizer, Alon Z.
    Morgan, Todd M.
    Hafez, Khaled S.
    Lee, Cheryl T.
    Li, Benjamin Y.
    Min, Hye Sung
    He, Chang
    Gilbert, Scott M.
    Helm, Jonathan E.
    Lavieri, Mariel S.
    Hollenbeck, Brent K.
    Skolarus, Ted A.
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2017, 104 : 78 - U105
  • [10] A Comparison of Postoperative Complications in Open versus Robotic Cystectomy
    Casey, K. Ng
    Kauffman, Eric C.
    Lee, Ming-Ming
    Otto, Brandon J.
    Portnoff, Alyse
    Ehrlich, Josh R.
    Schwartz, Michael J.
    Wang, Gerald J.
    Scherr, Douglas S.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2010, 57 (02) : 274 - 281