Robotic-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion versus open: early Australian experience.

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to describe our initial Australian single surgeon experience with robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) and to compare the outcomes with open radical cystectomy (ORC).

METHODS

Between January 2014 and June 2016, consecutive patients diagnosed with muscle invasive and high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy were included. Treatment modalities included either RARC with ICUD or ORC. ICUD consisted of either intracorporeal ileal conduit or orthotopic neobladder formation. Prospectively collected perioperative and oncological outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-six RARC and 13 ORC were performed. Median operating times were 362 and 240 min for RARC and ORC, respectively (P < 0.001). Estimated blood loss for RARC was 300 mL compared with 500 mL for ORC (P = 0.01). Post-operative haemoglobin drop was less in the RARC cohort (20% versus 24%, P = 0.03). There was no statistical difference in overall 90-day complication rates (81% versus 62%, P = 0.25) and 90-day major complication rates (19% versus 23%, P = 0.67) between the RARC and ORC groups, respectively. Positive surgical margins for RARC were 4% and 8% for ORC (P = 1.0).

CONCLUSION

Early results demonstrate that the safe introduction of RARC with ICUD in Australia is potentially feasible without compromising perioperative and oncological outcomes. Future randomized trial with larger numbers will be required for further analysis in the Australian setting.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles