Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Complications and health-related quality of life after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of four RCTs

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy is associated with high rates of perioperative morbidity. Robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is widely used today despite limited evidence for clinical superiority. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of RARC compared to open radical cystectomy (ORC) on complications and secondary on length of stay, time back to work and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

METHODS: The databases PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase and CINAHL were searched. A systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines and cumulative analysis was conducted. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined RARC compared to ORC were included in this review. We assessed the quality of evidence using the Cochrane Collaboration's 'Risk of bias' tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Data were extracted and analysed.

RESULTS: The search retrieved 273 articles. Four RCTs were included involving overall 239 patients. The quality of the evidence was of low to moderate quality. There was no significant difference between RARC and ORC in the number of patients developing complications within 30 or 90 days postoperatively or in overall grade 3-5 complications within 30 or 90 days postoperatively. Types of complications differed between the RARC and the ORC group. Likewise, length of stay and HRQoL at 3 and 6 months did not differ.

CONCLUSION: Our review presents evidence for RARC not being superior to ORC regarding complications, LOS and HRQoL. High-quality studies with consistent registration of complications and patient-related outcomes are warranted.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016038232.

Original languageEnglish
JournalSystematic Reviews
Volume6
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)e150
ISSN2046-4053
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Aug 2017

    Research areas

  • Journal Article

ID: 51683655