Robot-assisted Versus Open Radical Cystectomy in Patients Receiving Perioperative Chemotherapy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: The Oncologist's Perspective from a Multicentre Study

Intermediate-term survival of robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive and high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer in The Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Radical cystectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection is the recommended treatment in non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). In randomised trials, robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) showed non-inferior short-term oncological outcomes compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC). Data on intermediate and long-term oncological outcomes of RARC are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the intermediate-term overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients with MIBC and high-risk non-MIBC (NMIBC) who underwent ORC versus RARC in clinical practice.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A nationwide retrospective study in 19 Dutch hospitals including patients with MIBC and high-risk NMIBC treated by ORC (n = 1086) or RARC (n = 386) between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2015. Primary and secondary outcome measures were median OS and RFS, respectively. Survival outcomes were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. A multivariable Cox regression model was developed to adjust for possible confounders and to assess prognostic factors for survival including clinical variables, clinical and pathological disease stage, neoadjuvant therapy and surgical margin status.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 5.1 years (95% confidence interval ([95%CI] 5.0-5.2). The median OS after ORC was 5.0 years (95%CI 4.3-5.6) versus 5.8 years after RARC (95%CI 5.1-6.5). The median RFS was 3.8 years (95%CI 3.1-4.5) after ORC versus 5.0 years after RARC (95%CI 3.9-6.0). After multivariable adjustment, the hazard ratio for OS was 1.00 (95%CI 0.84-1.20) and for RFS 1.08 (95%CI 0.91-1.27) of ORC versus RARC. Patients who underwent ORC were older, had higher preoperative serum creatinine levels and more advanced clinical and pathological disease stage.

CONCLUSION

ORC and RARC resulted in similar intermediate-term OS and RFS in a cohort of almost 1500 MIBC and high-risk NMIBC.

Protocol of the Italian Radical Cystectomy Registry (RIC): a non-randomized, 24-month, multicenter study comparing robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery for radical cystectomy in bladder cancer

Background

Bladder cancer is the ninth most common type of cancer worldwide. In the past, radical cystectomy via open surgery has been considered the gold-standard treatment for muscle invasive bladder cancer. However, in recent years there has been a progressive increase in the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. The aim of the current project is to investigate the surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of patients with bladder cancer who undergo radical cystectomy comparing three different surgical techniques (robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery). Pre-, peri- and post-operative factors will be examined, and participants will be followed for a period of up to 24 months to identify risks of mortality, oncological outcomes, hospital readmission, sexual performance, and continence.

Methods

We describe a protocol for an observational, prospective, multicenter, cohort study to assess patients affected by bladder neoplasms undergoing radical cystectomy and urinary diversion. The Italian Radical Cystectomy Registry is an electronic registry to prospectively collect the data of patients undergoing radical cystectomy conducted with any technique (open, laparoscopic, robotic-assisted). Twenty-eight urology departments across Italy will provide data for the study, with the recruitment phase between 1st January 2017-31st October 2020. Information is collected from the patients at the moment of surgical intervention and during follow-up (3, 6, 12, and 24 months after radical cystectomy). Peri-operative variables include surgery time, type of urinary diversion, conversion to open surgery, bleeding, nerve sparing and lymphadenectomy. Follow-up data collection includes histological information (e.g., post-op staging, grading, and tumor histology), short- and long-term outcomes (e.g., mortality, post-op complications, hospital readmission, sexual potency, continence etc).

Discussion

The current protocol aims to contribute additional data to the field concerning the short- and long-term outcomes of three different radical cystectomy surgical techniques for patients with bladder cancer, including open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted. This is a comparative-effectiveness trial that takes into account a complex range of factors and decision making by both physicians and patients that affect their choice of surgical technique.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04228198. Registered 14th January 2020- Retrospectively registered.

Robotic versus open radical cystectomy throughout the learning phase: insights from a real-life multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has been shown to be non-inferior to open radical cystectomy (ORC) for the treatment of bladder cancer (BC). However, most data on RARC come from high-volume surgeons at high-volume centers. The objective of the study was to compare perioperative and mid-term oncologic outcomes of RARC versus ORC in a real-life cohort of patients treated by surgeons starting their experience with RARC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were prospectively collected from consecutive patients undergoing RARC and ORC at five referral Centers between 2010 and 2016 by five surgeons (one per center) with no prior experience in RARC. Patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive or organ-confined muscle-invasive (T2N0M0) bladder cancer were considered for RARC. The main study endpoints were perioperative outcomes, postoperative surgical complications, and mid-term oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 124 and 118 patients underwent RARC and ORC, respectively. Baseline patients' and tumors' characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Yet, the proportion of patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy was significantly higher in the RARC cohort. Median operative time was significantly higher, while median EBL, LOH, and transfusion rates were significantly lower after RARC. Median number of lymph nodes removed was significantly higher after RARC. All other histopathological outcomes, as well as the rate of early (< 30 days) and late postoperative complications, were comparable to ORC. At a median follow-up of 2 years, 29 (23%) and 41 (35%) patients developed disease recurrence (p = 0.05), while 20 (16%) and 37 (31%) died of bladder cancer (p = 0.005) after RARC and ORC, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

With proper patient selection, RARC was non-inferior to ORC throughout the surgeons' learning phase. Yet, the observed differences in oncologic outcomes suggest selection bias toward adoption of RARC for patients with more favorable disease characteristics.

Open Versus Robotic Cystectomy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis Comparing Survival Outcomes

Background: To assess the differential effect of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) versus open radical cystectomy (ORC) on survival outcomes in matched analyses performed on a large multicentric cohort. Methods: The study included 9757 patients with urothelial bladder cancer (BCa) treated in a consecutive manner at each of 25 institutions. All patients underwent radical cystectomy with bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy. To adjust for potential selection bias, propensity score matching 2:1 was performed with two ORC patients matched to one RARC patient. The propensity-matched cohort included 1374 patients. Multivariable competing risk analyses accounting for death of other causes, tested association of surgical technique with recurrence and cancer specific mortality (CSM), before and after propensity score matching. Results: Overall, 767 (7.8%) patients underwent RARC and 8990 (92.2%) ORC. The median follow-up before and after propensity matching was 81 and 102 months, respectively. In the overall population, the 3-year recurrence rates and CSM were 37% vs. 26% and 34% vs. 24% for ORC vs. RARC (all p values > 0.1), respectively. On multivariable Cox regression analyses, RARC and ORC had similar recurrence and CSM rates before and after matching (all p values > 0.1). Conclusions: Patients treated with RARC and ORC have similar survival outcomes. This data is helpful in consulting patients until long term survival outcomes of level one evidence is available.

Does the Use of a Robot Decrease the Complication Rate Adherent to Radical Cystectomy? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies Comparing Open with Robotic Counterparts

Introduction: Radical cystectomy (RC) is the mainstay of treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. In 2003, the first robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) was performed and since then many studies, mainly observational, were conducted to compare robotic and open methods. This study aims to assess perioperative outcomes between the two methods based on pooled data from existing literature. Methods: A literature search of articles in English and French languages was performed in three databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane) until 30th of June 2018, as well as in urology conference programs and reference lists of included studies. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42018103063). Terms such as "robotic," "open," and "radical cystectomy" and synonyms were used for the searching algorithm. The primary outcome was the number of minor and major postoperative complications (Clavien grading system). Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Comparison of continuous outcomes was performed with weighted mean differences, while for dichotomous outcomes, odds ratios (ORs) were used. Review Manager 5.3 was used. Results: Fifty-four studies (5 randomized trials and 49 observational) were eligible, including 29,697 patients (6500 in the RARC group and 23,197 in the open radical cystectomy group). Minor complications (grade 1-2) in pooled data of 29 studies were fewer in the RARC group (OR = 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38-0.76, p < 0.001), a difference persisting after sensitivity analysis for 30 and 90 days. Major complications (grade 3-5) in 31 studies were fewer in the RARC group (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.65-0.94, p = 0.009), but this difference disappeared in the 30-day subanalysis. RARC was associated with lower blood transfusion rates (p < 0.001), lower length of stay (p < 0.001), faster return to regular diet (p < 0.001), and lower postoperative mortality rates (p < 0.001), but longer operating time. Conclusions: RARC appears to be associated with fewer complications and favoring perioperative outcomes in comparison with the open method. Due to the observational nature of most studies, larger randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The efficacy of RARC in oncologic outcomes compared ORC is controversial. We assess potential differences in oncologic outcomes between robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC).

METHODS

We performed the literature search systematically according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement. A pooled meta-analysis was performed to assess the difference in oncologic outcomes between RARC and ORC, separately in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRCTs).

RESULTS

Five RCTs and 28 NRCTs were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. There was no difference in the rate of overall positive surgical margin (PSM) in RCTs, while NRCTs showed a lower rate for RARC. There was no difference in the soft tissue PSM rate between RARC and ORC in both RCTs and NRCTs. There was no difference in the lymph node yield by standard and extended lymph node dissection between RARC and ORC in both RCTs and NRCTs. There was no significant difference in survival outcomes between RARC and ORC in both RCTs and NRCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, there is no difference in the rate of PSMs, lymph node yield, recurrence rate and location as well as short-term survival outcomes between RARC and ORC in RCTs. In NRCTs, only PSM rates were better for RARC compared to ORC, but this was likely due to selection and reporting bias which are inherent to retrospective study designs.