Open radical cystectomy (RC) is historically the treatment of choice for patients who present with invasive disease, progressive disease, or disease refractory to intravesical therapy. Although retrospective data has suggested that robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is safer than RC, prospective data have been lacking. RAZOR indicated that RARC is associated with lower blood loss, lower transfusion rates, and a shorter length of hospital stay which was balanced by operating time (open radical cystectomy was faster); however, the trial did not show a difference in complication rates, which was the original attraction to RARC in the first place (see Table). So: is RARC justified? Some of the discussion was centred around whether the urinary diversions were performed extracorporeally, and whether intracorporeal diversion (less invasive) would demonstrate the benefit of robotic cystectomy. In addition, RARC was performed by surgeons whose operating times (averaging >7 h) were slower than average times for experienced surgeons, suggesting that the data may have been disproportionately affected by a learning curve.
Table: Selected findings from the RAZOR trial [1]
Should RARC be recommended in daily clinical practice on the basis of these results? On the one hand, the RAZOR trial provides level 1 evidence robustly arguing the oncological efficacy of RARC and supporting clinical advantages such as reduced blood loss and reduced hospital stay. On the other hand, RAZOR data indicates that RARC does not lower the rate of perioperative complications. The majority of cystectomies are performed in low-volume centres where robot-expertise is not available. One critical question that was also discussed is whether a cost–benefit analysis will favour one approach over the other. Lastly, high-level prospective data about intracorporeal urinary diversions will help settle this discussion.
Prof. James Catto (University of Sheffield, United Kingdom), referring to the UK-based iROC trial responds that he is awaiting iROC to complete accrual, with 219/340 patients registered/randomised at this time, since this prospective randomised controlled trial will either independently validate RAZOR’s conclusions, or -if contradictory- raise the discussion to an even more pitched level.
Posted on
Previous Article
« Life style Next Article
Pregnancy after breast cancer »
« Life style Next Article
Pregnancy after breast cancer »
Table of Contents: EAU 2019
Featured articles
Prostate Cancer
Barentsz Trial – Bi-parametric MRI versus multi-parametric MRI
Enzalutamide plus ADT improves outcomes for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer
Prostate cancer active surveillance: Better patient risk stratification and use of imaging
The role of pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer: Extended vs standard
When to use imaging and imaging-guided therapies
Radioguided surgery is the future?
Bladder Cancer
Largest safety study of its kind with atezolizumab in metastatic bladder cancer
Bladder cancer risk and early detection
Consensus treatment pathway for patients with limited pelvic lymph node involvement in otherwise localised bladder cancer
FGFR3 gene mutation: Favourable prognostic impact in bladder cancer
Bladder cancer in young patients
Spanish study directly links surgical volume with mortality in bladder cancer patients undergoing cystectomy
Updated interim results of phase 2 trial of pembrolizumab for high-risk NMIBC unresponsive to BCG
Robot-assisted radical cystectomy or open radical cystectomy?
Renal Transplantation and Renal Cell Carcinoma
Andrology
Microdissection testicular sperm extraction (microTESE)
Male infertility/Premature ejaculation
Testosterone replacement therapy: Safe and maybe even protective
Focus on treatment of erectile dysfunction and Peyronie’s disease
Penile prosthesis implantation
Functional Urology
Decision aids are too difficult for patients
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
The Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial
Minimally invasive surgical techniques must compete against pharmacotherapy in benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH)
Related Articles
© 2024 Medicom Medical Publishers. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy