Similar Long-Term Outcomes With Robotic vs Traditional Surgery in Patients With Bladder Cancer
In the largest multi-institutional study to date, patients diagnosed with bladder cancer and treated with robot-assisted surgery experienced similar results to those who underwent a traditional open operation, according to research led by scientists at Roswell Park Cancer Institute (RPCI). The study results were published by Yuh et al in European Urology.
“We found that robot-assisted radical cystectomy, despite local treatment in the bladder, provides similar early oncological outcomes, while reducing operative blood loss,” said Khurshid Guru, MD, Director of Robotic Surgery in the Department of Urology at RPCI.
Research Findings
The study is a retrospective review of long-term patient outcomes for cystectomies that currently populate the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium, which represents 11 institutions in 6 countries. Data from 702 patients with clinically localized bladder cancer from 2003 to date were analyzed for 5-year recurrence-free survival (67%), cancer-specific survival (75%), and overall survival (50%). When compared with traditional open surgery, patients treated with robot-assisted surgery experienced similar long-term survival outcomes.
Robot-assisted surgery allows surgeons to operate through small ports rather than large incisions. For patients, robot-assisted surgery results in shorter recovery times and minimal blood loss.
“Simply developing and using new minimally invasive surgery techniques isn’t enough. The medical community demands proof that minimally invasive surgery provides standard oncologic results as effective as open surgical standards,” said James Mohler, MD, Associate Director and Senior Vice President for Translational Research at Roswell Park. “This research is useful in continuing to document the viability of the new surgical therapies for the treatment of cancer.”
This work has been supported in part by the Vattikuti Foundation in Michigan.
The content in this post has not been reviewed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. (ASCO®) and does not necessarily reflect the ideas and opinions of ASCO®.
