Open versus laparoscopy-assisted radical cystectomy: results of a prospective study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Laparoscopic radical cystectomy is confined to centers where advanced laparoscopy is performed, and its role is not yet well clear. Our aim was to evaluate, through a prospective comparative study, the advantages of the laparoscopic compared with an open approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From November 2002 to December 2005, all the patients in our center who were found to have muscle-invasive bladder cancer without clinical evidence of lymph-node involvement and an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score <4 were included in a prospective nonrandomized study. Group A (N = 22) underwent open radical cystectomy, whereas group B (N = 20) underwent laparoscopy-assisted radical cystectomy. The two groups were demographically comparable. We evaluated the mean age, clinical stage, ASA score, operative time, blood loss, intraoperative complications and transfusions, type of diversion, time of catheterization, analgesic consumption, start of oral nutrition, rate of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, pathologic diagnosis of the specimen, number of lymph nodes removed, and the oncologic outcome.

RESULTS

No significant statistical difference was observed between the two groups in intraoperative and postoperative parameters except for analgesic consumption and the start of oral nutrition (P < 0.05). The mean operative time was 260 minutes (range 210-290 minutes) for group A and 284 minutes (range 260-305 minutes) for group B. The mean blood loss was 770 mL (range 450-870 mL) in group A and 520 mL (range 400-620 mL) in group B. The rate of autologous transfusion was 18% in group A and 10% in group B. Seventeen ileal diversions and five neobladder creations were performed in group A, whereas the Bricker diversion was used in 10 cases in group B, and a neobladder was chosen in the 10 other cases.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy-assisted radical cystectomy is a safe procedure, like open surgery, but it offers the advantage of minimal invasiveness, represented by reduced analgesic consumption and early recovery of peristalsis with rapid oral nutrition.