Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Intra-corporeal robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis comparing perioperative and long-term survival outcomes and recurrence patterns

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

To compare perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes and recurrence patterns between robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intra-corporeal urinary diversion (iRARC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 177 bladder cancer patients who received iRARC or ORC at Fujita Health University between 2008 and 2020. Our primary endpoint was long-term oncological outcomes. As a secondary endpoint, we examined perioperative outcomes, complications, and recurrence patterns. These outcome measures were compared between the propensity score (PS)-matched cohorts.

Results

PS-matched analysis resulted in 60 matched pairs from iRARC and ORC groups. The iRARC cohort was associated with significantly longer operative time (p = 0.02), lower estimated blood loss (p < 0.001), lower blood transfusion rate (p < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), fewer overall complications (p = 0.03), and lower rate of postoperative ileus (p = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference between iRARC and ORC in 5-year RFS (p = 0.46), CSS (p = 0.63), and OS (p = 0.71). RFS and CSS were also comparable, even in locally advanced (≥ cT3) disease. Multivariate analysis identified lymphovascular invasion as a robust predictor of RFS, CSS, and OS. The number of recurrence was similar between the groups, while extra-pelvic lymph nodes were more frequent in iRARC than that in ORC (22.7% vs. 7.7%).

Conclusions

iRARC has favorable perioperative outcomes, fewer complications, and comparable long-term survival outcomes, including locally advanced (≥ cT3) disease, compared to that in ORC. Our results need to be validated in prospective randomized clinical trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stein JP, Lieskovsky G, Cote R et al (2001) Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin Oncol 19(3):666–675. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2001.19.3.666

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Babjuk M, Böhle A, Burger M et al (2017) EAU guidelines on non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: update 2016. Eur Urol 71(3):447–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.05.041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nix J, Smith A, Kurpad R et al (2010) Prospective randomized controlled trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: perioperative and pathologic results. Eur Urol 57(2):196–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.10.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Parekh DJ, Messer J, Fitzgerald J et al (2013) Perioperative outcomes and oncologic efficacy from a pilot prospective randomized clinical trial of open versus robotic assisted radical cystectomy. J Urol 189(2):474–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bochner BH, Dalbagni G, Sjoberg DD et al (2015) Comparing open radical cystectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol 67(6):1042–1050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Khan MS, Gan C, Ahmed K et al (2016) A single-centre early phase randomised controlled three-arm trial of open, robotic, and laparoscopic radical cystectomy (CORAL). Eur Urol 69(4):613–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen DP, Al Hussein Al Awamlh B, Wu X et al (2015) Recurrence patterns after open and robot-assisted radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Eur Urol 68(3):399–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.02.003

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Bochner BH, Dalbagni G, Marzouk KH et al (2018) Randomized Trial Comparing Open Radical Cystectomy and Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy: Oncologic Outcomes. Eur Urol 74(4):465–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.04.030

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Elsayed AS, Gibson S, Jing Z et al (2020) Rates and patterns of recurrences and survival outcomes after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000001380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Parekh DJ, Reis IM, Castle EP et al (2018) Robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer (RAZOR): an open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 391(10139):2525–2536. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30996-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hussein AA, May PR, Jing Z et al (2018) Outcomes of intracorporeal urinary diversion after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the international robotic cystectomy consortium. J Urol 199(5):1302–1311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.045

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ost MC, Patel KP, Rastinehad AR et al (2008) Pneumoperitoneum with carbon dioxide inhibits macrophage tumor necrosis factor-alpha secretion: source of transitional-cell carcinoma port-site metastasis, with prophylactic irrigation strategies to decrease laparoscopic oncologic risks. J Endourol 22(1):105–112. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2007.9858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250(2):187–196. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Goh AC, Gill IS, Lee DJ et al (2012) Robotic intracorporeal orthotopic ileal neobladder: replicating open surgical principles. Eur Urol 62(5):891–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.07.052

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Davis NF, Burke JP, McDermott T et al (2015) Bricker versus Wallace anastomosis: a meta-analysis of ureteroenteric stricture rates after ileal conduit urinary diversion. Can Urol Assoc J 9(5–6):E284-290. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.2692

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Epstein JI, Amin MB, Reuter VR et al (1998) The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology consensus classification of urothelial (transitional cell) neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Bladder Consensus Conference Committee. Am J Surg Pathol 22(12):1435–1448. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000478-199812000-00001

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kanda Y (2013) Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software “EZR” for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant 48(3):452–458. https://doi.org/10.1038/bmt.2012.244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Clement KD, Pearce E, Gabr AH et al (2020) Perioperative outcomes and safety of robotic vs open cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 12,640 cases. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03385-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Venkatramani V, Reis IM, Castle EP et al (2020) Predictors of recurrence, and progression-free and overall survival following open versus robotic radical cystectomy: analysis from the RAZOR trial with a 3-year followup. J Urol 203(3):522–529. https://doi.org/10.1097/ju.0000000000000565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Iwata T, Kimura S, Foerster B et al (2019) Oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol 37(8):1557–1570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02708-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jonsson MN, Adding LC, Hosseini A et al (2011) Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion in patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Eur Urol 60(5):1066–1073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.07.035

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ahmed K, Khan SA, Hayn MH et al (2014) Analysis of intracorporeal compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. Eur Urol 65(2):340–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.042

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Desai MM, Gill IS (2015) “The devil is in the details”: randomized trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy. Eur Urol 67(6):1053–1055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tan WS, Sridhar A, Ellis G et al (2016) Analysis of open and intracorporeal robotic assisted radical cystectomy shows no significant difference in recurrence patterns and oncological outcomes. Urol Oncol 34(6):257.e251-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.02.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Simone G, Tuderti G, Misuraca L et al (2018) Perioperative and mid-term oncologic outcomes of robotic assisted radical cystectomy with totally intracorporeal neobladder: Results of a propensity score matched comparison with open cohort from a single-centre series. Eur J Surg Oncol 44(9):1432–1438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.04.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Challacombe BJ, Bochner BH, Dasgupta P et al (2011) The role of laparoscopic and robotic cystectomy in the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer with special emphasis on cancer control and complications. Eur Urol 60(4):767–775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2011.05.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nguyen DP, Al Hussein Al Awamlh B, Omalley P et al (2016) Factors impacting the occurrence of local, distant and atypical recurrences after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a detailed analysis of 310 patients. J Urol 196(5):1390–1396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sharma P, Zargar-Shoshtari K, Poch MA et al (2017) Surgical control and margin status after robotic and open cystectomy in high-risk cases: Caution or equivalence? World J Urol 35(4):657–663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-016-1915-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Khetrapal P, Tan WS, Lamb B et al (2017) Port-site metastases after robotic radical cystectomy: a systematic review and management options. Clin Genitourin Cancer 15(4):440–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2016.06.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hussein AA, Saar M, May PR et al (2017) Early oncologic failure after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the international robotic cystectomy consortium. J Urol 197(6):1427–1436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.12.048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bolenz C, Herrmann E, Bastian PJ et al (2010) Lymphovascular invasion is an independent predictor of oncological outcomes in patients with lymph node-negative urothelial bladder cancer treated by radical cystectomy: a multicentre validation trial. BJU Int 106(4):493–499. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09166.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shariat SF, Svatek RS, Tilki D et al (2010) International validation of the prognostic value of lymphovascular invasion in patients treated with radical cystectomy. BJU Int 105(10):1402–1412. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09217.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Zennami K, Sumitomo M, Takahara K et al (2021) Two cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with high-risk upper tract urothelial carcinoma. BJU Int 127(3):332–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukake-cho, Toyoake, Aichi, 470-1192, Japan

    Kenji Zennami, Makoto Sumitomo, Kiyoshi Takahara, Takuhisa Nukaya, Masashi Takenaka, Kosuke Fukaya, Manabu Ichino, Hitomi Sasaki & Ryoichi Shiroki

  2. Department of Urology, Fujita Health University Okazaki Medical Center, Okazaki, Japan

    Naohiko Fukami & Mamoru Kusaka

Authors
  1. Kenji Zennami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Makoto Sumitomo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kiyoshi Takahara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Takuhisa Nukaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Masashi Takenaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kosuke Fukaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Manabu Ichino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Naohiko Fukami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Hitomi Sasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Mamoru Kusaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Ryoichi Shiroki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenji Zennami.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No author has any conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zennami, K., Sumitomo, M., Takahara, K. et al. Intra-corporeal robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis comparing perioperative and long-term survival outcomes and recurrence patterns. Int J Clin Oncol 26, 1514–1523 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-021-01939-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-021-01939-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation