The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy (RA‐SRC). Materials and Methods We retrospectively searched the prospectively collected surgical database of two highly experienced robotic urological surgeons for cases of RA‐SRC, defined as RA...

Deskribapen osoa

Xehetasun bibliografikoak
Egile Nagusiak: Gal Rinott Mizrahi, Nathan Lawrentschuk, Benjamin Thomas, Philip Dundee
Formatua: Artikulua
Hizkuntza:English
Argitaratua: Wiley 2025-01-01
Saila:BJUI Compass
Gaiak:
Sarrera elektronikoa:https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.459
_version_ 1826577956306157568
author Gal Rinott Mizrahi
Nathan Lawrentschuk
Benjamin Thomas
Philip Dundee
author_facet Gal Rinott Mizrahi
Nathan Lawrentschuk
Benjamin Thomas
Philip Dundee
author_sort Gal Rinott Mizrahi
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Objectives To evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy (RA‐SRC). Materials and Methods We retrospectively searched the prospectively collected surgical database of two highly experienced robotic urological surgeons for cases of RA‐SRC, defined as RARC performed post‐previous pelvic RT for palliative or oncologic treatment purposes. Collected data included demographic and clinical information and outcome measures including operative course, hospital stay and complications. Results Eighteen patients were included in the current analysis. All patients had previous RT to the pelvis with 12 patients also having prior radical pelvic surgery. Indications for salvage cystectomy were either palliation (n = 12) or oncological (MIBC or high risk NMIBC, n = 6). There were no intraoperative complications and no conversions to open surgery. Ninety day postoperative complications were recorded in 11 patients (61.1%), with major complications (Clavien–Dindo grades 3 and 4) in three patients (16.6%). After a median follow‐up of 43.5 months, one late postoperative complication was observed requiring surgical intervention. Conclusion Our data, together with the limited published data from other cohorts of RA‐SRC, suggest that in experienced hands, RA‐SRC is feasible, with intraoperative and perioperative complication rates that are lower than the published data for open SRC and are equivalent to open primary RC. These data will contribute to treatment decision making both in patients with post‐pelvic radiation symptoms requiring palliation and patients with MIBC considering or treated with trimodal treatment.
first_indexed 2025-02-16T15:01:52Z
format Article
id doaj.art-5a74258bb64a4de584992165a51ff9a4
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2688-4526
language English
last_indexed 2025-03-14T13:54:43Z
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series BJUI Compass
spelling doaj.art-5a74258bb64a4de584992165a51ff9a42025-02-27T07:15:05ZengWileyBJUI Compass2688-45262025-01-0161n/an/a10.1002/bco2.459The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomyGal Rinott Mizrahi0Nathan Lawrentschuk1Benjamin Thomas2Philip Dundee3The Royal Melbourne Hospital Parkville Victoria AustraliaThe Royal Melbourne Hospital Parkville Victoria AustraliaThe Royal Melbourne Hospital Parkville Victoria AustraliaThe Royal Melbourne Hospital Parkville Victoria AustraliaAbstract Objectives To evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy (RA‐SRC). Materials and Methods We retrospectively searched the prospectively collected surgical database of two highly experienced robotic urological surgeons for cases of RA‐SRC, defined as RARC performed post‐previous pelvic RT for palliative or oncologic treatment purposes. Collected data included demographic and clinical information and outcome measures including operative course, hospital stay and complications. Results Eighteen patients were included in the current analysis. All patients had previous RT to the pelvis with 12 patients also having prior radical pelvic surgery. Indications for salvage cystectomy were either palliation (n = 12) or oncological (MIBC or high risk NMIBC, n = 6). There were no intraoperative complications and no conversions to open surgery. Ninety day postoperative complications were recorded in 11 patients (61.1%), with major complications (Clavien–Dindo grades 3 and 4) in three patients (16.6%). After a median follow‐up of 43.5 months, one late postoperative complication was observed requiring surgical intervention. Conclusion Our data, together with the limited published data from other cohorts of RA‐SRC, suggest that in experienced hands, RA‐SRC is feasible, with intraoperative and perioperative complication rates that are lower than the published data for open SRC and are equivalent to open primary RC. These data will contribute to treatment decision making both in patients with post‐pelvic radiation symptoms requiring palliation and patients with MIBC considering or treated with trimodal treatment.https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.459intraoperative complicationspelvic radiationpostoperative complicationsradical cystectomyrobotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy (RA‐SRC)salvage
spellingShingle Gal Rinott Mizrahi
Nathan Lawrentschuk
Benjamin Thomas
Philip Dundee
The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy
BJUI Compass
intraoperative complications
pelvic radiation
postoperative complications
radical cystectomy
robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy (RA‐SRC)
salvage
title The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy
title_full The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy
title_fullStr The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy
title_full_unstemmed The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy
title_short The feasibility and safety of robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy
title_sort feasibility and safety of robotic assisted salvage radical cystectomy
topic intraoperative complications
pelvic radiation
postoperative complications
radical cystectomy
robotic‐assisted salvage radical cystectomy (RA‐SRC)
salvage
url https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.459
work_keys_str_mv AT galrinottmizrahi thefeasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT nathanlawrentschuk thefeasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT benjaminthomas thefeasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT philipdundee thefeasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT galrinottmizrahi feasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT nathanlawrentschuk feasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT benjaminthomas feasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy
AT philipdundee feasibilityandsafetyofroboticassistedsalvageradicalcystectomy