» Articles » PMID: 37458737

Minimizing the Learning Curve for Robotic-assisted Radical Cystectomy A Single-surgeon, Retrospective, Cohort Study

Overview
Specialty Urology
Date 2023 Jul 17
PMID 37458737
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Studies published to date have suggested non-inferiority of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) compared to open radical cystectomy (ORC), while few centers in Canada have adopted this approach. Though multifactorial, the learning curve and operative time are often discussed barriers. Herein, we present outcomes from the largest Canadian cohort of RARC performed to date.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing RARC by a single surgeon with greater than 1500 robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) experience at our institution from May 2020 to December 2021. Clinicopathological, intraoperative, and postoperative data, as well as complications in the first 90 days, were collected. Regression analysis was used to determine the relationship between case volume and operative time/lymph node yield.

Results: A total of 31 patients underwent RARC during the study period, 26 of which were male. The median length of stay was six days (Q1-Q3 5-10), while days alive and out of hospital at 90 days were 83 days (Q1-Q3 80-85). Soft tissue margins were positive in 9.6% (3/31) of patients. Median lymph node yield was 17.0 lymph nodes (Q1-Q3 11-23). Median operative time was 241 minutes (Q1-Q3 228-252) in the ileal conduit group and 320 minutes (Q1-Q3 302-337) in the neobladder group. We observed four Clavien-Dindo grade >3 complications. The 90-day readmission rate and mortality rate were 17.2% (5) and 0% (0), respectively. There was no correlation between case volume and any outcome variables.

Conclusions: Previous high-volume experience performing RARP reduces the learning curve for performing RARC, with similar short-term outcomes to high-volume centers.

Citing Articles

A narrative review of advances in the management of urothelial cancer: Diagnostics and treatments.

Wu S, Xiong S, Li J, Hong G, Xie Y, Tang Q Bladder (San Franc). 2024; 11(1):e21200003.

PMID: 39308962 PMC: 11413229. DOI: 10.14440/bladder.2024.0003.

References
1.
Abboudi H, Khan M, Guru K, Froghi S, De Win G, van Poppel H . Learning curves for urological procedures: a systematic review. BJU Int. 2013; 114(4):617-29. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12315. View

2.
Bochner B, Dalbagni G, Sjoberg D, Silberstein J, Paz G, Donat S . Comparing Open Radical Cystectomy and Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol. 2014; 67(6):1042-1050. PMC: 4424172. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.043. View

3.
Mir M, Marchioni M, Zargar H, Zargar-Shoshtari K, Fairey A, Mertens L . Nomogram Predicting Bladder Cancer-specific Mortality After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer: Results of an International Consortium. Eur Urol Focus. 2020; 7(6):1347-1354. DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.07.002. View

4.
Murphy D, Challacombe B, Elhage O, OBrien T, Rimington P, Khan M . Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion: initial experience. Eur Urol. 2008; 54(3):570-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.04.011. View

5.
Catto J, Khetrapal P, Ricciardi F, Ambler G, Williams N, Al-Hammouri T . Effect of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion vs Open Radical Cystectomy on 90-Day Morbidity and Mortality Among Patients With Bladder Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2022; 327(21):2092-2103. PMC: 9109000. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2022.7393. View