SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
A systematic review and meta-analysis of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal urinary diversion after robotic-assisted radical cystectomy in elderly patients with malignancy.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies have highlighted the progress of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), yet information on intracorporeal (ICUD) and extracorporeal urinary diversion (ECUD), especially in elderly patients, remains limited. This review seeks to address this gap in the literature. A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, following the PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing ICUD to ECUD in patients aged ≥ 65 years. We combined the data using weighted mean differences (WMD) or odds ratios (OR) with random-effects models. For results showing moderate-to-high heterogeneity, a sensitivity analysis was performed by sequentially excluding individual studies. Nine studies comprising 4340 patients (1967 in ICUD and 2373 in ECUD) were included in the meta-analysis. ICUD was associated with significantly lower estimated blood loss (WMD: - 64.34 mL, 95% CI: - 113.26, - 15.42, P = 0.01), reduced blood transfusion rates (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.76, P = 0.01), and fewer overall gastrointestinal complications (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.92, P = 0.016) compared to ECUD in patients aged 65 and older. No significant differences were found in operative duration, length of hospitalization, or 30-day/90-day complication and readmission rates. Sensitivity analysis indicated low evidence for outcomes such as blood loss and transfusion rates. Overall, elderly patients undergoing RARC may benefit from ICUD in terms of reduced blood loss, lower blood transfusion rates, and fewer gastrointestinal complications. However, large prospective randomized studies are still required to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40059272What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.