Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal urinary diversion in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal urinary diversion in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal urinary diversion in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal urinary diversion in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
2021
Overview
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess and compare the perioperative and oncological outcomes of intracorporeal (ICUD) and extracorporeal (ECUD) urinary diversion following robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). A systematic literature search of articles was performed in PubMed®, Web of Science®, and Scopus® databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. We included studies that compared patients who underwent RARC with ICUD to those with ECUD. Twelve studies including 3067 patients met the eligibility criteria. There were no significant differences between ICUD and ECUD in overall and major complications, regardless of the period (short-term [≤ 30 days] or mid-term [> 30 days]). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that ICUD performed by high-volume centers exhibited a significantly reduced risk of major complications (short-term: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37–0.86, p = 0.008, mid-term: OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46–0.94, p = 0.02). Patients who underwent ICUD had lower estimated blood loss (MD -102.3 ml, 95% CI − 132.8 to − 71.8, p < 0.00001), less likely to receive blood transfusion rates (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20–0.62, p = 0.00003); and these findings were consistent in subgroup analyses by low-volume centers (MD-121.6 ml, 95% CI − 160.9 to − 82.3, p < 0.00001 and OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.20–0.62, p = 0.00003, respectively). ICUD had a higher lymph node yield (MD 3.68, 95% CI 0.80–6.56, p = 0.01). Patients receiving ICUD provided comparable complications, superior perioperative outcomes, and similar oncological outcomes compared with ECUD. Centralization of patients may contribute to a reduction of postoperative complications, while maintaining the advantages.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
