Hitendra R H Patel1, Pedro Bargão Santos2, Manuel Castanheira de Oliveira3, Stig Müller4,5. 1. Department of Urology, University Hospital North Norway (UNN), Tromsö, Norway. hrhpatel@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Urology, Hospital CUF Descobertas, Lisbon, Portugal. 3. Department of Urology, Centro Hospitalar do Porto - Hospital de San Antonio, Oporto, Portugal. 4. Department of Urology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. 5. Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Totally intracorporeal robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has perceived difficulties compared to open radical cystectomy (ORC). As the technique is increasingly adopted around the world, the benefits of RARC with intra- or extracorporeal urinary diversion or ORC for the patients are still unclear. In this article, we consider the current evidence for this issue. METHODS: We assessed two questions through using expert opinion and the medical literature: (A) Is RARC better than ORC for removing the cancer surgery and outcome? (B) Is RARC better than ORC for the urinary diversion? OUTCOMES: (A) RARC is better than ORC for shorter length of stay, blood loss and complication rates. (B) Intracorporeal orthotopic neobladder may have a significant physiological and surgical benefit to the patient recovery. CONCLUSIONS: RARC with total intracorporeal reconstruction has potential benefits to the patient. We recommend that all surgeons document patient-related outcome measures, urodynamics and enhanced recovery protocols for cystectomy patients to help us understand the real improvements within bladder cancer surgery and reconstruction.
BACKGROUND: Totally intracorporeal robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has perceived difficulties compared to open radical cystectomy (ORC). As the technique is increasingly adopted around the world, the benefits of RARC with intra- or extracorporeal urinary diversion or ORC for the patients are still unclear. In this article, we consider the current evidence for this issue. METHODS: We assessed two questions through using expert opinion and the medical literature: (A) Is RARC better than ORC for removing the cancer surgery and outcome? (B) Is RARC better than ORC for the urinary diversion? OUTCOMES: (A) RARC is better than ORC for shorter length of stay, blood loss and complication rates. (B) Intracorporeal orthotopic neobladder may have a significant physiological and surgical benefit to the patient recovery. CONCLUSIONS: RARC with total intracorporeal reconstruction has potential benefits to the patient. We recommend that all surgeons document patient-related outcome measures, urodynamics and enhanced recovery protocols for cystectomy patients to help us understand the real improvements within bladder cancer surgery and reconstruction.
Authors: Bertram Yuh; Timothy Wilson; Bernie Bochner; Kevin Chan; Joan Palou; Arnulf Stenzl; Francesco Montorsi; George Thalmann; Khurshid Guru; James W F Catto; Peter N Wiklund; Giacomo Novara Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Kristoffer Lassen; Marielle M E Coolsen; Karem Slim; Francesco Carli; José E de Aguilar-Nascimento; Markus Schäfer; Rowan W Parks; Kenneth C H Fearon; Dileep N Lobo; Nicolas Demartines; Marco Braga; Olle Ljungqvist; Cornelis H C Dejong Journal: World J Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Bernard H Bochner; Guido Dalbagni; Daniel D Sjoberg; Jonathan Silberstein; Gal E Keren Paz; S Machele Donat; Jonathan A Coleman; Sheila Mathew; Andrew Vickers; Geoffrey C Schnorr; Michael A Feuerstein; Bruce Rapkin; Raul O Parra; Harry W Herr; Vincent P Laudone Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2014-12-08 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Kamran Ahmed; Shahid A Khan; Matthew H Hayn; Piyush K Agarwal; Ketan K Badani; M Derya Balbay; Erik P Castle; Prokar Dasgupta; Reza Ghavamian; Khurshid A Guru; Ashok K Hemal; Brent K Hollenbeck; Adam S Kibel; Mani Menon; Alex Mottrie; Kenneth Nepple; John G Pattaras; James O Peabody; Vassilis Poulakis; Raj S Pruthi; Joan Palou Redorta; Koon-Ho Rha; Lee Richstone; Matthias Saar; Douglas S Scherr; Stefan Siemer; Michael Stoeckle; Eric M Wallen; Alon Z Weizer; Peter Wiklund; Timothy Wilson; Michael Woods; Muhammad Shamim Khan Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Ji Sung Shim; Tae Gyun Kwon; Koon Ho Rha; Young Goo Lee; Ji Youl Lee; Byong Chang Jeong; Jong Hyun Pyun; Sung Gu Kang; Seok Ho Kang Journal: Investig Clin Urol Date: 2019-12-18