Abstract
To prospectively evaluate short-term outcomes between a novel minimally invasive kidney transplantation (MIKT) technique and conventional kidney transplantation (CKT). From March 2018 to February 29, 2019, 148 patients were randomized into MIKT and CKT groups. All patients were followed up for 12 months. The MIKT group had a significantly shorter incision length (5.6 ± 0.4 vs 11.4 ± 0.4 cm, P < .001). There was no difference in operation time, blood loss, acute rejection, infection, and wound dehiscence between MIKT and CKT groups. Both groups had comparable pain scores and analgesic requirements in the first 3 days after transplantation and comparable renal function at 12 months. The MIKT group had higher satisfaction than the CKT group during follow-up (9.3 ± 0.3 vs 8.1 ± 0.5, P < .001; 9.5 ± 0.2 vs 8.5 ± 0.3, P < .001; 9.4 ± 0.3 vs 8.5 ± 0.3, P < .001; 9.2 ± 0.3 vs 8.5 ± 0.4, P=.003 for posttransplant months 1, 3, 6, and 12, respectively). The MIKT group had a significantly lower Vancouver Scar Scale score (4.1 ± 0.4 vs 5.2 ± 0.5, P < .001; 4.3 ± 0.4 vs 6.1 ± 0.4, P < .001; 5.2 ± 0.6 vs 6.7 ± 0.5, P < .001; 7.7 ± 0.7 vs 8.9 ± 0.5, P=.009 for posttransplant months 1, 3, 6, and 12, respectively). MIKT has demonstrated equivalent safety and improved patient satisfaction compared to CKT. This technique may be an appropriate choice for selected patients.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
