OBJECTIVE:In Japan, no study has compared the perioperative outcomes observed between robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC).
This study aimed at a prospective comparison of the perioperative outcomes between RARC and ORC performed by a single surgeon.
METHODS: Between 2008 and 2011, 26 bladder cancer patients underwent radical cystectomy by one surgeon, 11 robotically and 15 by open procedure. We prospectively collected perioperative and pathological data for these 26 patients, and retrospectively compared these two different surgical procedures.
RESULTS: The RARC cohort had a significant decrease in both estimated blood loss (656.9 vs. 1788.7 ml, P= 0.0015) and allogeneic transfusion requirement (0 vs. 40%, P= 0.0237). The total operative time was almost the same (P = 0.2306) but increased duration of bladder removal and lymphadenectomy was observed in the RARC cohort (P= 0.0049). Surgery-related complication rates within 30 days were not significantly different (P= 0.4185). Positive surgical margin was observed in three patients in the ORC cohort and in one patient in the RARC cohort (P= 0.4664). The RARC cohort had a larger number of removed lymph nodes than the ORC cohort, and the difference was statistically significant (20.7 vs. 13.8, P= 0.0421).
CONCLUSIONS: We confirmed that RARC is safe and yields acceptable outcomes in comparison with ORC for the treatment of bladder cancer if it is performed by a surgeon who has experience of over 60 cases of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. It is hoped that RARC will gain acceptance in Japan as a minimally invasive surgery for muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Written by:
Gondo T, Yoshioka K, Nakagami Y, Okubo H, Hashimoto T, Satake N, Ozu C, Horiguchi Y, Namiki K, Tachibana M. Are you the author?
Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan.
Reference: Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2012 May 11. Epub ahead of print.
doi: 10.1093/jjco/hys062
PubMed Abstract
PMID: 22581913
UroToday.com Bladder Cancer Section