Introduction: Surgeries, such as radical cystectomy (RC), induce a systemic inflammatory response (SIR). SIR plays an important role in controlling the human immune system. This study aims at comparing the SIR in robot-assisted laparoscopic cystectomy (RALC) to open mini-laparotomy cystectomy (OMC) with a urinary diversion (UD). Comparison was based on immunologic markers of SIR, thus quantifying the degree of tissue trauma. Materials and Methods: Forty-two male patients underwent RC with an ileal conduit. Either OMC RC (OMC; n = 20), RALC with extracorporeal UD (RALC-EUD; n = 13), or RALC with intracorporeal UD (RALC-IUD; n = 9) was performed. Blood samples were obtained preoperatively (PREOP), immediately after surgery (POD0), 24 (POD1) and 48 h (POD2) postoperatively. Clinical parameters were collected from medical records. Results: Estimated blood loss and blood transfusion volume was higher in OMC (p's < 0.001). The operative time was longer in RALC groups (p < 0.001). On POD0, interleukin (IL)-6 showed significant lower level in RALC-IUD compared to OMC (p = 0.016). IL-10 level was higher at POD0 (p = 0.029) and POD1 (p = 0.038) in OMC vs. RALC-EUD. MCP-1 levels for RALC-IUD were significantly lower compared to RALC-EUD (p = 0.027). Conclusions: This study found that postoperative SIR was overall less pronounced in RALC, thus depicting reduced tissue trauma. No major clinical differences between RALC-IUD and -EUD were found.

Keywords:
Comparative study, Cystectomy, Cytokines, Inflammation , Minimally invasive surgical procedures, Urinary bladder neoplasms
1.
Desborough JP: The stress response to trauma and surgery. Br J Anaesth 2000;85:109-117.
2.
Watt DG, Horgan PG, McMillan DC: Routine clinical markers of the magnitude of the systemic inflammatory response after elective operation: a systematic review. Surgery 2015;157:362-380.
3.
Novitsky YW, Litwin DE, Callery MP: The net immunologic advantage of laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 2004;18:1411-1419.
4.
Ishibashi S, Takeuchi H, Fujii K, Shiraishi N, Adachi Y, Kitano S: Length of laparotomy incision and surgical stress assessed by serum IL-6 level. Injury 2006;37:247-251.
5.
West MA, Hackam DJ, Baker J, Rodriguez JL, Bellingham J, Rotstein OD: Mechanism of decreased in vitro murine macrophage cytokine release after exposure to carbon dioxide: relevance to laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 1997 ;226:179-190.
6.
Buunen M, Gholghesaei M, Veldkamp R, Meijer DW, Bonjer HJ, Bouvy ND: Stress response to laparoscopic surgery: a review. Surg Endosc 2004;18:1022-1028.
7.
Ure BM, Niewold TA, Bax NM, Ham M, van der Zee DC, Essen GJ: Peritoneal, systemic, and distant organ inflammatory responses are reduced by a laparoscopic approach and carbon dioxide versus air. Surg Endosc 2002;16:836-842.
8.
Shimotakahara A, Kuebler JF, Vieten G, Kos M, Metzelder ML, Ure BM: Carbon dioxide directly suppresses spontaneous migration, chemotaxis, and free radical production of human neutrophils. Surg Endosc 2008;22:1813-1817.
9.
Shibata J, Ishihara S, Tada N, Kawai K, Tsuno NH, Yamaguchi H, et al: Surgical stress response after colorectal resection: a comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery. Tech Coloproctol 2015;19:275-280.
10.
Fracalanza S, Ficarra V, Cavalleri S, Galfano A, Novara G, Mangano A, et al: Is robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy less invasive than retropubic radical prostatectomy? Results from a prospective, unrandomized, comparative study. BJU Int 2008;101:1145-1149.
11.
Matsumoto ED, Margulis V, Tunc L, Taylor GD, Duchene D, Johnson DB, et al: Cytokine response to surgical stress: comparison of pure laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and open nephrectomy. J Endourol 2005;19:1140-1145.
12.
Miyake H, Kawabata G, Gotoh A, Fujisawa M, Okada H, Arakawa S, et al: Comparison of surgical stress between laparoscopy and open surgery in the field of urology by measurement of humoral mediators. Int J Urol 2002;9:329-333.
13.
Ruzic B, Tomaskovic I, Trnski D, Kraus O, Bekavac-Beslin M, Vrkic N: Systemic stress responses in patients undergoing surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int 2005;95:77-80.
14.
Wang SZ, Chen Y, Lin HY, Chen LW: Comparison of surgical stress response to laparoscopic and open radical cystectomy. World J Urol 2010;28:451-455.
15.
Bochner BH, Dalbagni G, Sjoberg DD, Silberstein J, Keren Paz GE, Donat SM, et al: Comparing open radical cystectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy: a Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur Urol 2015;67:1042-1050.
16.
Nix J, Smith A, Kurpad R, Nielsen ME, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS: Prospective randomized controlled trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: perioperative and pathologic results. Eur Urol 2010;57:196-201.
17.
Parekh DJ, Messer J, Fitzgerald J, Ercole B, Svatek R: Perioperative outcomes and oncologic efficacy from a pilot prospective randomized clinical trial of open versus robotic assisted radical cystectomy. J Urol 2013;189:474-479.
18.
Pyun JH, Kim HK, Cho S, Kang SG, Cheon J, Lee JG, et al: Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with total intracorporeal urinary diversion: comparative analysis with extracorporeal urinary diversion. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2016;23:349-355.
19.
Wilson TG, Guru K, Rosen RC, Wiklund P, Annerstedt M, Bochner BH, et al: Best practices in robot-assisted radical cystectomy and urinary reconstruction: recommendations of the pasadena consensus panel. Eur Urol 2015;67:363-375.
20.
Jensen JB, Pedersen KV, Olsen KO, Bisgaard UF, Jensen KM: Mini-laparotomy approach to radical cystectomy. BJU Int 2011;108:1125-1130.
21.
Moller MK, Hoyer S, Jensen JB. Extended versus superextended lymph-node dissection in radical cystectomy: subgroup analysis of possible recurrence-free survival benefit. Scand J Urol 2016;50:175-180.
22.
Menger MD, Vollmar B: Surgical trauma: hyperinflammation versus immunosuppression? Langenbecks Arch Surg 2004;389:475-484.
23.
Brune IB, Wilke W, Hensler T, Holzmann B, Siewert JR: Downregulation of T helper type 1 immune response and altered pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory T cell cytokine balance following conventional but not laparoscopic surgery. Am J Surg 1999;177:55-60.
24.
Ng CS, Whelan RL, Lacy AM, Yim AP: Is minimal access surgery for cancer associated with immunologic benefits? World J Surg 2005;29:975-981.
25.
Leung KL, Lai PB, Ho RL, Meng WC, Yiu RY, Lee JF, et al: Systemic cytokine response after laparoscopic-assisted resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 2000;231:506-511.
26.
Neuhaus SJ, Watson DI: Pneumoperitoneum and peritoneal surface changes: a review. Surg Endosc 2004;18:1316-1322.
27.
Moehrlen U, Ziegler U, Boneberg E, Reichmann E, Gitzelmann CA, Meuli M, et al: Impact of carbon dioxide versus air pneumoperitoneum on peritoneal cell migration and cell fate. Surg Endosc 2006;20:1607-1613.
28.
Jaffer U, Wade RG, Gourlay T: Cytokines in the systemic inflammatory response syndrome: a review. HSR Proc Intensive Care Cardiovasc Anesth 2010;2:161-175.
29.
Brand A: Immunological aspects of blood transfusions. Transpl Immunol 2002;10:183-190.
30.
Jackman RP, Utter GH, Muench MO, Heitman JW, Munz MM, Jackman RW, et al: Distinct roles of trauma and transfusion in induction of immune modulation after injury. Transfusion 2012;52:2533-2550.
31.
McMahon AJ, OʼDwyer PJ, Cruikshank AM, McMillan DC, OʼReilly DS, Lowe GD, et al: Comparison of metabolic responses to laparoscopic and minilaparotomy cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 1993;80:1255-1258.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.