Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between Open and Robotic Radical Cystectomy: A Population-Based Analysis. Academic Article uri icon

Overview

abstract

  • INTRODUCTION: Radical cystectomy represents the standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Due to its novelty the use of robotic radical cystectomy (RARC) is still under debate. We examined intraoperative and postoperative morbidity and mortality in addition to impact on length of stay (LOS) and total hospital charges (THCGs) of RARC compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within National Inpatient Sample (2008-2013), we identified patients with nonmetastatic bladder cancer treated with either ORC or RARC. We relied on inverse probability of treatment weighting to reduce the effect of inherent differences between ORC vs RARC. Multivariable logistic regression (MLR) and multivariable Poisson regression (MPR) models were used. RESULTS: Of all 10,027 patients, 12.6% underwent RARC. Between 2008 and 2013, RARC rates increased from 0.8% to 20.4% [estimated annual percentage change (EAPC): +26.5%, 95% confidence interval (CI): +11.1 to +48.3; p = 0.035] and RARC THCGs decreased from 45,981 to 31,749 United States dollars (EAPC: -6.8%, 95% CI: -9.6 to -3.9; p = 0.01). In MLR models RARC resulted in lower rates of overall complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.6; p < 0.001] and transfusions (OR: 0.44; p < 0.001). In MPR models, RARC was associated with shorter LOS (relative risk 0.91; p < 0.001). Finally, higher THCGs (OR: 1.09; p < 0.001) were recorded for RARC. Data are retrospective and no tumor characteristics were available. CONCLUSION: RARC is related to lower rates of overall complications and transfusions rates. In consequence, RARC is a safe and feasible technique in select MIBC patients. Moreover, RARC is associated with shorter LOS, although higher THCGs.

publication date

  • July 2, 2018

Research

keywords

  • Cystectomy
  • Robotic Surgical Procedures
  • Urinary Bladder Neoplasms

Identity

Scopus Document Identifier

  • 85051544420

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1089/end.2018.0313

PubMed ID

  • 29845866

Additional Document Info

volume

  • 32

issue

  • 8