FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2023651938> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2023651938 endingPage "84" @default.
• W2023651938 startingPage "79" @default.
• W2023651938 abstract "No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Jan 2011Robot Assisted Extended Pelvic Lymphadenectomy at Radical Cystectomy: Lymph Node Yield Compared With Second Look Open Dissection John W. Davis, Kris Gaston, Roosevelt Anderson, Colin P.N. Dinney, H. Barton Grossman, Mark F. Munsell, and Ashish M. Kamat John W. DavisJohn W. Davis Financial interest and/or other relationship with Genprobe. More articles by this author , Kris GastonKris Gaston More articles by this author , Roosevelt AndersonRoosevelt Anderson More articles by this author , Colin P.N. DinneyColin P.N. Dinney Financial interest and/or other relationship with AstraZeneca, National Cancer Institute, Schering Plough, Spectrum and Novartis. More articles by this author , H. Barton GrossmanH. Barton Grossman Financial interest and/or other relationship with PhotoCure, GE Healthcare, Ferring, Viventia, Abbott Molecular, OncoMethylome and Tengion. More articles by this author , Mark F. MunsellMark F. Munsell More articles by this author , and Ashish M. KamatAshish M. Kamat Financial interest and/or other relationship with Adalor, Bioniche, Celgene, Bioste, Endo, Tetralogic, AstraZeneca and Precision Therapeutics. More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.031AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: Robot assisted radical cystectomy outcomes show feasibility and potential benefits for patient recovery. However, it is difficult to judge the completeness of extended robot assisted vs open pelvic lymph node dissection using only the lymph node count and template description. We performed a prospective protocol in which radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection done in robot assisted fashion were followed by second look open pelvic lymph node dissection. Our primary objective was to determine the fraction of lymph nodes yielded by robot assisted pelvic lymph node dissection. Materials and Methods: Patients with pure transitional cell carcinoma and no locally advanced features were selected for robot assisted radical cystectomy. A team of 2 urological oncologists performed radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in robot assisted fashion, followed by second look open pelvic lymph node dissection. Lymph nodes from robot assisted dissection were submitted in up to 8 separate specimens by anatomical location. Any additional specimens retrieved at open dissection were submitted separately. Results: The protocol was completed in 11 patients from October 2007 to June 2009. The median yield of robot assisted and second look open pelvic lymph node dissection was 43 (range 19 to 63) and 4 (range 0 to 8), respectively, for an overall robot assisted yield of 93%. Of second look open pelvic lymph node dissections 67% were clear of residual tissue, 13% had tissue without lymph nodes and 20% had 1 or more lymph nodes. Median operative time for robot assisted pelvic lymph node dissection was 117 minutes. Concurrently open radical cystectomy without required multiple lymph node specimen submission yielded a median 24 nodes. Conclusions: Our data showing a robot assisted pelvic lymph node dissection yield of 93% of that of open surgery should allay concern that the robot assisted technique limits the completeness of pelvic lymph node dissection. References 1 : Laparoscopic radical cystectomy: formidable challenge to the gold standard. J Endourol2008; 22: 2069. Google Scholar 2 : Radical cystectomy in the treatment of invasive bladder cancer: long-term results in 1,054 patients. J Clin Oncol2001; 19: 666. Google Scholar 3 : A critical analysis of perioperative mortality from radical cystectomy. J Urol2006; 175: 886. Link, Google Scholar 4 : Laparoscopic cystectomy: initial report on a new treatment for the retained bladder. J Urol1992; 148: 1140. Link, Google Scholar 5 : Complications in laparoscopic radical cystectomy: The South American experience with 59 cases . Int Braz J Urol2006; 32: 300. Google Scholar 6 : Laparoscopic cystectomy with extracorporeal-assisted urinary diversion: experience with 34 patients. Eur Urol2007; 51: 193. Google Scholar 7 : Laparoscopic radical cystectomy with continent urinary diversion (rectal sigmoid pouch) performed completely intracorporeally: the initial 5 cases. J Urol2001; 165: 1863. Link, Google Scholar 8 : Laparoscopic radical cystectomy with ileal conduit performed completely intracorporeally: the initial 2 cases. Urology2000; 56: 26. Google Scholar 9 : Laparosopic radical cystectomy and continent orthotopic ileal neobladder performed completely intracorporeally: the initial experience. J Urol2002; 168: 13. Link, Google Scholar 10 : Laparoscopic extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for bladder cancer: technique and initial outcomes. J Urol2004; 172: 1809. Link, Google Scholar 11 : Nerve-sparing radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion. BJU Int2003; 92: 232. Google Scholar 12 : Extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy and its impact on outcome in patients diagnosed with bladder cancer: analysis of data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data base. J Urol2003; 169: 946. Link, Google Scholar 13 : Impact of the number of lymph nodes retrieved on outcome in patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. J Urol2002; 167: 1295. Link, Google Scholar 14 : Assessing the minimum number of lymph nodes needed at radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer. BJU Int2009; 103: 1359. Google Scholar 15 : Surgical factors influence bladder cancer outcomes: a cooperative group report. J Clin Oncol2004; 22: 2781. Google Scholar 16 : Risk factors for patients with pelvic lymph node metastases following radical cystectomy with en bloc pelvic lymphadenectomy: concept of lymph node density. J Urol2003; 170: 35. Link, Google Scholar 17 : Evaluation of the relevance of lymph node density in a contemporary series of patients undergoing radical cystectomy. J Urol2006; 176: 53. Link, Google Scholar 18 : Lymphadenectomy for invasive bladder cancer: II. Technical aspects and prognostic factors . BJU Int2006; 97: 232. Google Scholar 19 : Prospectively packaged lymph node dissections with radical cystectomy: evaluation of node count variability and node mapping. J Urol2004; 172: 1286. Link, Google Scholar 20 : Impact of separate versus en bloc pelvic lymph node dissection on the number of lymph nodes retrieved in cystectomy specimens. J Urol2001; 166: 2295. Link, Google Scholar 21 : Editorial comment. J Urol2010; 183: 870. Link, Google Scholar 22 : The lymph node yield during robot-assisted radical cystectomy. BJU Int2008; 102: 231. Google Scholar 23 : Prospective randomized controlled trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: perioperative and pathologic results. Eur Urol2010; 57: 196. Google Scholar 24 : Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: intermediate survival results at a mean follow-up of 25 months. BJU Int2009; 105: 1706. Google Scholar 25 : Short-term quality-of-life assessed after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a prospective analysis. BJU Int2009; 103: 800. Google Scholar 26 : Robot-assisted radical cystectomy vs. open radical cystectomy: assessment of postoperative pain. Can J Urol2007; 14: 3753. Google Scholar 27 : Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: an expert panel review of the current status and future direction. Urol Oncol2010; 28: 480. Google Scholar 28 : Robotic radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: surgical and pathological outcomes in 100 consecutive cases. J Urol2010; 183: 510. Link, Google Scholar 29 : Cost analysis of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer. J Urol2010; 183: 505. Link, Google Scholar © 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByNavai N and Dinney C (2018) Oncologic Equivalence between Laparoscopic/Robotic and Open Radical CystectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 195, NO. 6, (1646-1647), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2016.Parekh D, Messer J, Fitzgerald J, Ercole B and Svatek R (2018) Perioperative Outcomes and Oncologic Efficacy from a Pilot Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial of Open Versus Robotic Assisted Radical CystectomyJournal of Urology, VOL. 189, NO. 2, (474-479), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2013.Abaza R, Dangle P, Gong M, Bahnson R and Pohar K (2018) Quality of Lymphadenectomy is Equivalent With Robotic and Open Cystectomy Using an Extended TemplateJournal of Urology, VOL. 187, NO. 4, (1200-1205), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2012.Morgan T, Kaffenberger S and Cookson M (2018) Surgical and Chemotherapeutic Management of Regional Lymph Nodes in Bladder CancerJournal of Urology, VOL. 188, NO. 4, (1081-1088), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2012. Volume 185Issue 1January 2011Page: 79-84 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2011 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordscarcinoma cystectomyurinary bladderlymph node excisionroboticsMetricsAuthor Information John W. Davis Financial interest and/or other relationship with Genprobe. More articles by this author Kris Gaston More articles by this author Roosevelt Anderson More articles by this author Colin P.N. Dinney Financial interest and/or other relationship with AstraZeneca, National Cancer Institute, Schering Plough, Spectrum and Novartis. More articles by this author H. Barton Grossman Financial interest and/or other relationship with PhotoCure, GE Healthcare, Ferring, Viventia, Abbott Molecular, OncoMethylome and Tengion. More articles by this author Mark F. Munsell More articles by this author Ashish M. Kamat Financial interest and/or other relationship with Adalor, Bioniche, Celgene, Bioste, Endo, Tetralogic, AstraZeneca and Precision Therapeutics. More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ..." @default.
• W2023651938 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5006702120 @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5032400726 @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5034005227 @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5037985318 @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5049589636 @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5062542152 @default.
• W2023651938 creator A5072567477 @default.
• W2023651938 date "2011-01-01" @default.
• W2023651938 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2023651938 title "Robot Assisted Extended Pelvic Lymphadenectomy at Radical Cystectomy: Lymph Node Yield Compared With Second Look Open Dissection" @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1561551759 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W188018480 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1974546225 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1976698554 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1979476705 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1995938908 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1997441440 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1998662282 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W1999224735 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2017634789 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2019812794 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2042757342 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2067322835 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2067369099 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2069690639 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2074428151 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2087152834 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2099606826 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2100198850 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2100480913 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2106281891 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2112972623 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2113156769 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2123191706 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2146684961 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2160144380 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W2160553230 @default.
• W2023651938 cites W4246497210 @default.
• W2023651938 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.09.031" @default.
• W2023651938 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21074799" @default.
• W2023651938 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2023651938 type Work @default.
• W2023651938 sameAs 2023651938 @default.
• W2023651938 citedByCount "50" @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382012 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382013 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382014 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382015 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382016 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382017 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382018 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382019 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382020 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382021 @default.
• W2023651938 countsByYear W20236519382023 @default.
• W2023651938 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5006702120 @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5032400726 @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5034005227 @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5037985318 @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5049589636 @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5062542152 @default.
• W2023651938 hasAuthorship W2023651938A5072567477 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C2775862295 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C2775910329 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C2780352672 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C2780824555 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C2780849966 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C121608353 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C126322002 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C126894567 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C141071460 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C2775862295 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C2775910329 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C2780352672 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C2780824555 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C2780849966 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C61434518 @default.
• W2023651938 hasConceptScore W2023651938C71924100 @default.
• W2023651938 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2023651938 hasLocation W20236519381 @default.
• W2023651938 hasLocation W20236519382 @default.
• W2023651938 hasOpenAccess W2023651938 @default.
• W2023651938 hasPrimaryLocation W20236519381 @default.
• W2023651938 hasRelatedWork W1480365582 @default.
• W2023651938 hasRelatedWork W1980018778 @default.
• W2023651938 hasRelatedWork W1989626086 @default.
• W2023651938 hasRelatedWork W1999937677 @default.
• W2023651938 hasRelatedWork W2050296411 @default.
• W2023651938 hasRelatedWork W2072567737 @default.

• next