↓ Skip to main content

Complications and health-related quality of life after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of four RCTs

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
Complications and health-related quality of life after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of four RCTs
Published in
Systematic Reviews, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13643-017-0547-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanne Vahr Lauridsen, Hanne Tønnesen, Bente Thoft Jensen, Bruno Neuner, Peter Thind, Thordis Thomsen

Abstract

Radical cystectomy is associated with high rates of perioperative morbidity. Robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is widely used today despite limited evidence for clinical superiority. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of RARC compared to open radical cystectomy (ORC) on complications and secondary on length of stay, time back to work and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The databases PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase and CINAHL were searched. A systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines and cumulative analysis was conducted. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined RARC compared to ORC were included in this review. We assessed the quality of evidence using the Cochrane Collaboration's 'Risk of bias' tool and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Data were extracted and analysed. The search retrieved 273 articles. Four RCTs were included involving overall 239 patients. The quality of the evidence was of low to moderate quality. There was no significant difference between RARC and ORC in the number of patients developing complications within 30 or 90 days postoperatively or in overall grade 3-5 complications within 30 or 90 days postoperatively. Types of complications differed between the RARC and the ORC group. Likewise, length of stay and HRQoL at 3 and 6 months did not differ. Our review presents evidence for RARC not being superior to ORC regarding complications, LOS and HRQoL. High-quality studies with consistent registration of complications and patient-related outcomes are warranted. PROSPERO CRD42016038232.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Other 8 9%
Student > Master 7 8%
Researcher 5 5%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 32 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 8%
Psychology 4 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 32 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,218,829
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#882
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,988
of 317,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#28
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,621 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.