Tyritzis Stavros I, Wiklund N Peter
Section of Urology, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Center for Minimally Invasive Urological Surgery, Athens Medical Center, Athens, Greece.
Int J Urol. 2018 Mar;25(3):187-195. doi: 10.1111/iju.13497. Epub 2017 Nov 26.
In 2018, robot-assisted radical cystectomy will enter its 15th year. In an era where an effort is being made to standardize complication reporting and videos of the procedure are readily available, it is inevitable and justified that like everything novel, robot-assisted radical cystectomy should be scrutinized against the gold standard, open radical cystectomy. The present comparison is focused on several parameters: oncological, functional and complication outcomes, and direct and indirect costs. Meta-analysis and prospective randomized trials comparing robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy have been published, showing an oncological equivalence and in some cases an advantage of robot-assisted radical cystectomy in terms of postoperative morbidity. In the present review, we attempt to update the available knowledge on this debate and discuss the limitations of the current evidence that prevent us from drawing safe conclusions.
2018年,机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术将迎来其第15个年头。在一个努力使并发症报告标准化且手术视频随手可得的时代,与所有新事物一样,机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术应与金标准——开放性根治性膀胱切除术——进行对比审查,这是不可避免且合理的。目前的比较集中在几个参数上:肿瘤学、功能和并发症结果,以及直接和间接成本。比较机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术与开放性根治性膀胱切除术的荟萃分析和前瞻性随机试验已经发表,显示出肿瘤学等效性,并且在某些情况下,机器人辅助根治性膀胱切除术在术后发病率方面具有优势。在本综述中,我们试图更新关于这场争论的现有知识,并讨论当前证据的局限性,这些局限性使我们无法得出可靠的结论。