Systematic review of open versus laparoscopic versus robot-assisted nephroureterectomy

Upper tract urothelial carcinoma is a relatively uncommon malignancy. The gold standard treatment for this type of neoplasm is an open radical nephroureterectomy with excision of the bladder cuff. This systematic review compares the perioperative and oncologic outcomes for the open surgical method with the alternative surgical management options of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy and robot-assisted nephroureterectomy (RANU). MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched using a sensitive search strategy. Article inclusion was then assessed by review of abstracts and full papers were read if more detail was required. In all, 50 eligible studies were identified that looked at perioperative and oncologic outcomes. The range for estimated blood loss when examining observational studies was 296 to 696 mL for open nephroureterectomy (ONU), 130 to 479 mL for laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU), and 50 to 248 mL for RANU. The one randomized controlled trial identified reported estimated blood loss and length of stay results in which LNU was shown to be superior to ONU (P < .001). No statistical significance was found, however, following adjustment for confounding variables. Although statistically insignificant results were found when examining outcomes of RANU studies, they were promising and comparable with LNU and ONU with regard to oncologic outcomes. Results show that laparoscopic techniques are superior to ONU in perioperative results, and the longer-term oncologic outcomes look comparable. There is, however, a paucity of quality evidence regarding ONU, LNU, and RANU; data that address RANU outcomes are particularly scarce. As the robotic field within urology advances, it is hoped that this technique will be investigated further using gold standard research methods.