Systematic review of robotic radical cystectomy functional and quality of life outcomes
Keywords:RARC, quality of life, robotic cystectomy, review of QOL
This systematic review summarizes the urinary continence, male sexual function, and female sexual function outcomes after robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). Greater intracorporeal diversion use, longer followup, and clearly stated urinary continence definitions have revealed RARC urinary continence rates for orthotopic ileal neobladders that are similar to those after open radical cystectomy (ORC) when using the strictest continence definitions. Nerve-sparing technique appears to be well-used in most studies, with short-term and long-term RARC potency rates similar to those after ORC when using the strictest potency definitions. Level 1 evidence using validated questionnaires suggests that quality of life outcomes are also similar.
How to Cite
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.