ScholarWorks@성균관대학교

초록

Background/Objectives: While robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is widely adopted, its long-term survival impact relative to open radical cystectomy (ORC) remains uncertain. We compared survival outcomes between ORC and RARC using a propensity score-matched multicenter cohort. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 3972 radical cystectomy patients from 11 Korean tertiary centers between 2003 and 2024. After stratifying by surgical approach (ORC vs. RARC), 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) mitigated baseline imbalances. Overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox analyses. Results: PSM yielded 473 well-balanced patients per group. Compared to ORC, RARC was associated with a longer operative time but demonstrated a superior perioperative profile, including reduced estimated blood loss, lower intraoperative transfusion rates, shorter hospital stays, higher lymph node yields, and lower positive margin rates. RARC significantly improved OS (5-year: 75.4% vs. 56.1%; 10-year: 68.3% vs. 44.5%; p < 0.001) and CSS (5-year: 88.1% vs. 71.6%; 10-year: 82.7% vs. 67.7%; p < 0.001), with comparable RFS (5-year: 59.6% vs. 54.8%; 10-year: 51.1% vs. 47.4%; p = 0.155). Multivariable analyses confirmed RARC as an independent predictor of improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.564, p < 0.001) and CSS (HR 0.474, p < 0.001). Conclusions: RARC demonstrated superior perioperative outcomes and favorable survival trends compared to ORC, with no difference in RFS. Although RARC appears to be an oncologically safe alternative, these exploratory survival benefits require cautious interpretation due to potential residual confounding. Further prospective validation is warranted.

키워드