Comparative Evaluation of the Results of Radical Surgical Treatment of Patients with Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Malignant neoplasms of the bladder with invasion into the muscle layer of the organ wall (MIBC) are recognized as a highly aggressive pathology with a poorly predicted outcome, a high mortality rate, involving patients of any age without gender differences. Radical surgery’s in patients with MIBC has long and highly established itself as one of the main methods of treatment. However, the results of open surgical interventions are still accompanied by a high level of complications. The materials of medical literature (PubMed, CrossRef) for 2000–2023 were studied, with the issues of comparative evaluation of the results of surgical treatment of patients with MIBC, complications of the postoperative period. The search was conducted on the key phrases “bladder cancer”, “open cystectomy”, “robot-assisted cystectomy”, “cancer-specific survival”. The widespread introduction of video-endoscopic methods of treating patients with this disease into clinical practice has made it possible to speak about a decrease in the volume of intraoperative blood loss, the frequency of infectious complications of the wound and inpatient stay. The development of robot-assisted bladder surgery (RARC) demonstrates a number of advantages of using the daVinci robot in terms of reducing the number of postoperative complications during the traditional to study the 30–60–90-day follow-up periods. The issues of rehabilitation of patients after various methods of urine diversion, the medical-economic aspects for RARC in expert urological centers and the feasibility of the widespread introduction of this technique in medical institutions remain unclear. The coverage of these issues in the medical scientific literature is ambiguous, and therefore requires additional analysis.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Vladimir Yu. Startsev

St. Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: doc.urolog@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1243-743X

MD, PhD, Professor

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Sergey V. Sarychev

Spital Thurgau AG

Email: sergey.sarychev@gmx.ch
ORCID iD: 0009-0001-6822-5869

MD, PhD, Department of Urology

Switzerland, Frauenfeld

Nikolay I. Tyapkin

Leningrad Regional Clinical Hospital

Email: nikt1982@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2479-0436

MD

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Gleb V. Kondratiev

St. Petersburg State Pediatric Medical University

Email: spbgvk@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1462-6907

MD

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

References

  1. Witjes JA. Follow-up in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: facts and future. World J Urol. 2021;39(11):4047–4053. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03569-2
  2. Чиссов В.И., Старинский В.В., Петрова Г.В. (ред.) Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2008 г. (заболеваемость и смертность). — М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена, 2010. — 256 с. [Chissov VI, Starinsky VV, Petrova GV. (eds). Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2008 (morbidity and mortality). Moscow: Herzen Moscow State Medical Research Institute; 2010. 256 p. (In Russ.)]
  3. Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2020 году / под ред. А.Д. Каприна, В.В. Старинского, А.О. Шахзадовой. — М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена, 2021. — 239 с. [The state of oncological care for the population of Russia in 2020 / ed. by Kaprin AD, Starinsky VV, Shakhzadova AO. Moscow: Herzen Moscow State Medical Research Institute; 2021. 239 p. (In Russ.)]
  4. Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2020 году (заболеваемость и смертность) / под ред. А.Д. Каприна, В.В. Старинского, А.О. Шахзадовой. — М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена, 2021. — 252 с. [Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2020 (morbidity and mortality) / ed. by Kaprin AD, Starinsky VV, Shakhzadova AO. Moscow: P.A. Herzen Moscow State Medical Research Institute; 2021. 252 p. (In Russ.)]
  5. Cheng L, Lopez-Beltran A, MacLennan GT, et al. Neoplasms of the urinary bladder. Urologic Surgical Pathology. D.G. Bostwick, L. Cheng (eds). Philadelphia, PA, USA: Elsevier/Mosby; 2008. P. 259–352.
  6. Grossman HB, Soloway M, Messing E, et al. Surveillance for recurrent bladder cancer using a point-of-care proteomic assay. JAMA. 2006;295(3):299–305. doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.3.299
  7. Старцев В.Ю., Балашов А.Е., Мерзляков А.С., и др. Молекулярные детерминанты рецидива уротелиальной опухоли человека // Онкоурология. — 2021. — Т. 17. — № 3. — С. 130–139. [Startsev VYu, Balashov AE, Merzlyakov AS, et al. Molecular determinants of recurrences of the human urothelial tumor. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology. 2021;17(3):130–139. (In Russ.)] doi: https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2021-17-3-130-139
  8. Колонтарев К.Б., Медведев В.Л., Семенякин И.В., и др. Робот-аасистированная радикальная цистэктомия: Методические рекомендации № 29. — М.: АБВ-пресс, 2018. — 29 с. [Kolontarev KB, Medvedev VL, Semenyakin IV, et al. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Guidelines No. 29. Moscow: ABC Press; 2018. 29 p. (In Russ.)]
  9. Novotny V, Hakenberg OW, Wiessner D, et al. Perioperative complications of radical cystectomy in a contemporary series. Eur Urol. 2007;51(2):397–401. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.06.014
  10. Hautmann RE, Volkmer BG, Schumacher MC, et al. Long-term results of standard procedures in urology: the ileal neobladder. World J Urol. 2006;24(3):305–314. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-006-0105-z
  11. Котов С.В., Хачатрян А.Л., Гуспанов Р.И., и др. Оценка частоты послеоперационных хирургических осложнений у пациентов, подвергшихся радикальной цистэктомии // Онкоурология. 2018. — Т. 14. — № 4. — С. 95–102. [Kotov SV, Khachatryan AL, Guspanov RI, et al. Evaluation of surgical complications incidence after radical cystectomy. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology. 2018;14(4):95–102. (In Russ.)] doi: https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-4-95-102
  12. Павлов В.Н., Урманцев М.Ф., Бакеев М.Р. Успехи робот-ассистированной цистэктомии в лечении мышечно-инвазивного рака мочевого пузыря // Онкоурология. — 2022. — Т. 18. — № 2. — С. 123–128. [Pavlov VN, Urmantsev MF, Bakeev MR. The success of robot-assisted cystectomy in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Onkourologiya = Cancer Urology. 2022;18(2):123–128. (In Russ.)] doi: https://doi.org/10.17650/1726-9776-2022-18-2-123-128
  13. Binder J, Bräutigam R, Jonas D, et al. Robotic surgery in urology: fact or fantasy? BJU Int. 2004;94(8):1183–1187. doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2004.05130.x
  14. Lau CS, Blackwell RH, Quek ML. Radical cystectomy: open vs robotic approach. J Urol. 2015;193(2):400–402. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.11.079
  15. Tyritzis SI, Collins JW, Wiklund NP. The current status of robot-assisted cystectomy. Indian J Urol. 2018;34(2):101–109. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/iju.IJU_355_17
  16. Wiklund NP. Technology Insight: surgical robots – expensive toys or the future of urologic surgery? Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2004;1(2):97–102. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpuro0055
  17. Parra RO, Andrus CH, Jones JP, et al. Laparoscopic cystectomy: initial report on a new treatment for the retained bladder. J Urol. 1992;148(4):1140–1144. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36843-x
  18. Basillote JB, Abdelshehid C, Ahlering TE, et al. Laparoscopic assisted radical cystectomy with ileal neobladder: a comparison with the open approach. J Urol. 2004;172(2):489–493. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000129662.83162.2e
  19. Haber GP, Campbell SC, Colombo JR Jr., et al. Perioperative outcomes with laparoscopic radical cystectomy: “pure laparoscopic” and “open-assisted laparoscopic” approaches. Urology. 2007;70(5):910–915. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2007.07.012
  20. Khan MS, Gan C, Ahmed K, et al. A Single-centre early phase randomized controlled three-arm trial of open, robotic, and laparoscopic radical cystectomy (CORAL). Eur Urol. 2016;69(4):613–621. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.038
  21. Kaouk JH, Gill IS, Desai MM, et al. Laparoscopic orthotopic ileal neobladder. J Endourol. 2001;15(2):131–142. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/089277901750134386
  22. van Velthoven RF, Piechaud T. Laparoscopic radical cystectomy with ileal conduit diversion. Curr Urol Rep. 2005;6(2):93–100. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-005-0074-6
  23. Menon M, Hemal AK, Tewari A, et al. Nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical cystprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int. 2003;92(3):232–236. doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04329.x
  24. Kaul SA, Menon M. Da Vinci assisted cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion: a paradigm shift in surgical management of bladder cancer. Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2007;59(2):149–157.
  25. Matsumoto K, Tabata KI, Hirayama T, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy is a safe and effective procedure for patients with bladder cancer compared to laparoscopic and open surgery: perioperative outcomes of a single-center experience. Asian J Surg. 2019; 42(1):189–196. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2017.11.002
  26. Gandaglia G, Karl A, Novara G, et al. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted vs. open radical cystectomy in bladder cancer patients: a comparison of two high-volume referral centers. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42(11):1736–1743. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.02.254
  27. Parekh D, Reis IM, Castle EP, et al. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer (RAZOR): an open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2018;391(10139):2525–2536. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30996-6
  28. Mastroianni R, Tuderti G, Anceschi U, et al. Comparison of patient-reported health-related quality of life between open radical cystectomy and robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion: interim analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8(2):465–471. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.03.002
  29. Novara G, Catto JWF, Wilson T, et al. Systematic review and cumulative analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):376–401. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.007
  30. Yuh B, Wilson T, Bochner B, et al. Systematic review and cumulative analysis of oncologic and functional outcomes after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):402–422. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.12.008
  31. Rai BP, Bondad J, Vasdev N, et al. Robot-assisted vs open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in adults. BJU Int. 2020;125(6):765–779. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14870
  32. Studer UE. The Surgeon Makes the Difference, Not the Instrument Used. Eur Urol. 2015;67(6):1051–1052. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.01.018
  33. Roth B, Wissmeyer MP, Zehnder P, et al. A new multimodality technique accurately maps the primary lymphatic landing sites of the bladder. Eur Urol. 2010;57(2):205–211. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2009.10.026
  34. Wijburg CJ, Michels CTJ, Hannink G, et al. Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy in Bladder Cancer Patients: A Multicentre Comparative Effectiveness Study. Eur Urol. 2021;79(5):609–618. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.12.023
  35. Mendrek M, Witt JH, Sarychev S., et al. Reporting and grading of complications for intracorporeal robot-assisted radical cystectomy: an in-depth short-term morbidity assessment using the novel Comprehensive Complication Index®. World J Urol. 2022;40(7):1679–1688. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04051-x
  36. Ahmed K, Khan SA, Hayn MH, et al. Analysis of intracorporeal compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. Eur Urol. 2014;65(2):340–347. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.042
  37. Hussein AA, May PR, Jing Z, et al. Collaborators Outcomes of Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion after Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. J Urol. 2018;199(5):1302–1311. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.12.045
  38. Zhang JH, Ericson KJ, Thomas LJ, et al. Large Single Institution Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications of Open Radical Cystectomy, Intracorporeal Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy and Robotic Extracorporeal Approach. J Urol. 2020;203(3):512–521. doi: https://doi.org/0.1097/JU.0000000000000570
  39. Teoh JY, Chan EO, Kang SH, et al. Perioperative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Urinary Diversion. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(13):9209–9215. doi: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10295-5
  40. Michels CTJ, Wijburg CJ, Hannink G, et al. Robot-assisted Versus Open Radical Cystectomy in Bladder Cancer: An Economic Evaluation Alongside a Multicenter Comparative Effectiveness Study. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8(3):739–747. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2021.06.004
  41. Deuker M, Stolzenbach LF, Collà Ruvolo C, et al. Obesity is associated with adverse short-term perioperative outcomes in patients treated with open and robot-assisted radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. Urol Oncol. 2021;39(1):75.e17–75.e25. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2020.06.020
  42. Machleid F, Ho-Wrigley J, Chowdhury A, et al. Cost-utility analysis of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy for bladder cancer compared to open radical cystectomy in the United Kingdom. PLoS One. 2022;17(9):e0270368. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270368
  43. Zakaria AS, Santos F, Dragomir A, et al. Postoperative mortality and complications after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in Quebec: a population-based analysis during the years 2000–2009. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(7–8):259–267. doi: https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.1997
  44. Han JH, Ku JH. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Where we are in 2023. Investig Clin Urol. 2023;64(2):107–117. doi: https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.20220384
  45. Khan MS, Omar K, Ahmed K, et al. Long-term oncological outcomes from an early phase randomized controlled three-arm trial of open, robotic, and laparoscopic radical cystectomy (CORAL). Eur Urol. 2020;77(1):110–118. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2019.10.027
  46. Kim TH, Sung HH, Jeon HG, et al. Oncological outcomes in patients treated with radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: comparison between open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted approaches. J Endourol. 2016;30(7):783–791. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2015.0652
  47. Michels CTJ, Wijburg CJ, Leijte E, et al. A cost-effectiveness modeling study of robot-assisted (RARC) versus open radical cystectomy (ORC) for bladder cancer to inform future research. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(6):1058–1065. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.04.014

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2023 "Paediatrician" Publishers LLC



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies