Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonoma University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Spain.
Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2023 Jun;47(5):261-270. doi: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.01.003. Epub 2023 Feb 2.
Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been launched in the last decade to examine the surgical safety and oncological efficacy of robot-assisted (RARC) vs open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer. The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of RARC vs ORC.
A literature search was conducted through July 2022 using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The outcomes were intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes of RARC vs ORC.
A total of eight RCTs comprising 1,024 patients met our inclusion criteria. RARC was associated with longer operative time (mean 92.34min, 95% CI 83.83-100.84, p<0.001) and lower blood transfusion rate (Odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61, p<0.001). No differences emerged in terms of 90-day overall (p=0.28) and major (p=0.57) complications, length of stay (p=0.18), bowel recovery (p=0.67), health-related quality of life (p=0.86), disease recurrence (p=0.77) and progression (p=0.49) between the two approaches. The main limitation is represented by the low number of patients included in half of RCTs included.
This study supports that RARC is not inferior to ORC in terms of surgical safety and oncological outcomes. The benefit of RARC in terms of lower blood transfusion rate need to be balanced with the cost related to the procedure.
在过去十年中,已经开展了几项随机对照试验 (RCT),以检查机器人辅助 (RARC) 与开放式根治性膀胱切除术 (ORC) 治疗膀胱癌患者的手术安全性和肿瘤疗效。本研究的目的是对 RCT 进行系统评价和荟萃分析,以比较 RARC 与 ORC 的围手术期和肿瘤学结果。
通过 PubMed/Medline、Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库进行文献检索,以确定符合条件的研究。遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 指南。结果是 RARC 与 ORC 的术中、术后和肿瘤学结果。
共有 8 项 RCT 纳入了 1024 名符合条件的患者。RARC 与手术时间更长相关(平均 92.34 分钟,95%CI 83.83-100.84,p<0.001)和较低的输血率(比值比 [OR] 0.43,95%CI 0.30-0.61,p<0.001)。在 90 天总(p=0.28)和主要(p=0.57)并发症、住院时间(p=0.18)、肠道恢复(p=0.67)、健康相关生活质量(p=0.86)、疾病复发(p=0.77)和进展(p=0.49)方面,两种方法之间没有差异。主要限制是纳入的 RCT 中有一半的患者数量较少。
本研究支持 RARC 在手术安全性和肿瘤学结果方面不逊于 ORC。RARC 降低输血率的好处需要与该手术相关的成本相平衡。