IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i23p15995-d988944.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Janusz Lisiński

    (Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Pomeranian Medical University, Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Jakub Kienitz

    (Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Pomeranian Medical University, Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Piotr Tousty

    (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pomeranian Medical University, Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Krystian Kaczmarek

    (Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Pomeranian Medical University, Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Artur Lemiński

    (Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Pomeranian Medical University, Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Marcin Słojewski

    (Department of Urology and Urological Oncology, Pomeranian Medical University, Powstańców Wielkopolskich 72, 70-111 Szczecin, Poland)

Abstract

The goal of the study was to compare laparoscopic and open radical cystectomy in treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer in the Department of Urology and Oncological Urology PUM in Szczecin. A total of 78 patients in the study group underwent laparoscopic cystectomy between 2016–2018, and 81 patients from the control group had open cystectomy between 2014–2016. Both groups were comparable in terms of age, stage, and concomitant diseases. The 3 year overall survival was comparable in both groups (37.7% for laparoscopy and 44.4% for open, p = 0.64). There was no difference in positive surgical margin rate. Lymph node yield during cystectomy was higher in open cystectomy (14 vs. 11.5, p = 0.001). Post-operative blood loss and transfusion rates were lower in laparoscopic cystectomy. Decrease in hemoglobin level was lower in laparoscopy (0.9 mmol/L, p < 0.001). Intraoperative transfusion rate was 11.8% in laparoscopy vs. 34.8% in open cystectomy ( p = 0.002). Operation time, duration of hospitalisation, and time to full oral alimentation were comparable in both groups. Patients with BMI > 30 kg/m 2 and those with pT3-T4 cancer in the laparoscopy group had less septic complications post-operatively. Patients with ASA score ≥ 3 from the laparoscopy group had fewer reoperations due to ileus. Laparoscopic cystectomy is less invasive and offers similar oncological outcomes to the open method. Patients benefit from less tissue trauma, less blood loss, and faster recovery. The presented results, as well as other publications, should encourage a wider use of this procedure in everyday urological practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Janusz Lisiński & Jakub Kienitz & Piotr Tousty & Krystian Kaczmarek & Artur Lemiński & Marcin Słojewski, 2022. "Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-12, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15995-:d:988944
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15995/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/23/15995/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:23:p:15995-:d:988944. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.