Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy Research Articles

Relationship between surgical difficulty and postoperative complications of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy and establishment of prediction model

BackgroundFew studies have systematically explored the factors influencing the difficulty of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. To investigate the relationship between the difficulty of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy and postoperative complications of the donor as well as the recipient, and then build a model for predicting the difficulty of surgery.MethodsIn this study, 60 patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy by the same surgeon from September 2022 to March 2024 were included as the modeling group. 20 patients operated on by another surgeon served as the external validation group. The subjective score (1–3 points) of surgical difficulty was used as the quantitative index of surgical difficulty. Pearson and Spearman correlation tests were used to explore the correlation between preoperative data and surgical difficulty scores of kidney donors, and finally built a prediction model through multiple linear regression analysis.ResultsWith the increase in the difficulty of operation, both donors and recipients’ complications were increased. Linear regression analysis showed that only the number of renal arteries, visceral fat thickness and MAP score were independent risk factors for the difficulty of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. The prediction equation is as follows: Difficulty score = 0.584*Number of renal arteries + 0.731*MAP score + 0.110*visceral fat thickness.ConclusionsDonors with higher surgical difficulty are more likely to have serious complications after surgery as well as the recipient. We also established a reliable prediction model for the difficulty of hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

Effectiveness of Postoperative Single-shot and Continuous Transverse Abdominis Plane Block Compared to Conventional Analgesia in Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Live-donor Nephrectomy.

Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block in patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy (HALN). We aimed to evaluate the analgesic effectiveness of TAP block as part of a multimodal pain management regimen in patients undergoing HALN. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of living kidney donors at our center between June 2016 and February 2020. HALNs were performed via a transperitoneal approach through a suprapubic incision. Additional laparoscopic ports were used in the upper midabdomen. In consenting donors, TAP block was performed postoperatively under ultrasound guidance with either a single-shot or continuous infusion of long-acting local anesthetic (0.2%-0.5% ropivacaine). All the patients received postoperative around-the-clock ketorolac and acetaminophen. Overall, 72 donors received the block (block group, 38 single-shot, 34 continuous), whereas 86 donors did not receive the block (control group). Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups except for body weight (control: 71.8 ± 13.3 versus block: 77.8 ± 17.3 kg; P = 0.01) and intraoperative opioid dose (32.1 ± 9.6 versus 26.6 ± 10.7 morphine milligram equivalents; P < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline differences, postoperative opioid requirements were similar between the groups. When the baseline pain scale was adjusted for, there was no difference in the overall pain scale scores between the groups (P = 0.242). Subgroup analyses comparing single-shot or continuous TAP versus control did not show any differences. With the caveat of the retrospective nature of the study, the adjunctive effect of TAP block after transabdominal HALN was limited when other multimodal analgesia was used.

Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy in the Republic of North Macedonia.

Introduction: Hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy has become the technique of choice for living donor kidney donations. Since 2018, 30 procedures have been performed at our clinic using this technique. The goal of this comparative analysis was to determine how surgical technique, specifically, hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with hand assistance may affect early graft function when compared to open classical nephrectomy. Material and methods: Retrospective analyses were performed, comparing the two techniques of kidney donation. Kidney transplantation was performed with the open standard technique in both groups. The primary outcome was early graft function, and levels of urine output, and plasma creatinine were analyzed at three time points. A secondary outcome was the quality of the operative technique, which was determined by the time of warm ischemia, blood loss, and duration of surgery. Additionally, we noted all complications, length of hospital stay, and patient satisfaction. Results: In terms of warm ischemia time, there was no statistically significant difference between donors in both groups. It is important to note that in 2 recipients from Group II we did not observe diuresis at the conclusion of the operation. The recipients' diuresis was 515 ml ± 321SD in group I and 444 ml ± 271SD in group II. At 3, 12, and 36 hours postoperatively, there were statistically significant differences in the average serum creatinine values (p 0.05) in favor of group I. Similar results were observed in the second time measurement at 12 h and the third time measurement at 36 h for serum urea levels in recipients. The difference in serum urea values between the recipients in the groups at the first measurement (3h) following surgery was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is recognized as a safe and effective treatment. Donors in this situation have a different profile from other surgical patients; hence, they do not undergo surgery due to their own medical condition but for an altruistic reason, and with hand-assisted living donor nephrectomy. Such patients receive all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. The two main objectives of a donor nephrectomy are to give the recipient the best possible kidney and to ensure the donor's complete safety.

Complications After Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy

ObjectiveTo study the complications of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALLDN) with an emphasis on complications occurring early after hospital discharge up to 120 days after surgery. Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively categorized complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification in 3002 HALLDNs performed at 1 center from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2019. In addition to overall summaries, modeling was used to identify correlates of complications before and after living donation. ResultsOf these donors, 87% were White, 59% were female, the mean age was 45 years (range, 18-77 years), 30.3% had a body mass index of at least 30, and 36.3% had previous abdominopelvic surgery. There were no deaths related to the surgery. The incidence of major complications (intraoperative complications plus Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III postoperatively) was 2.5% (n=74). The overall complication rate was 12.4% (n=371), including 15 intraoperative, 76 postoperative before discharge, and 280 after discharge to 120 days. Reoperation was required in 1.8% of patients (n=54), and all but 1 of these were incision-related problems. Seventy-six percent of all complications occurred after discharge, including 85% of the reoperations. For major complications, no risk factor was found. Risk factors for any complication included paramedian incision (hazard ratio [HR], 2.54; 95% CI, 1.49 to 4.34; P<.001); a history of abdominopelvic surgery (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.76; P=.01), male sex (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.76; P=.01), non-White race (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.88; P=.02), and early era of the experience. ConclusionMost major complications of HALLDN occur after discharge, suggesting that close follow-up is warranted and that the current literature may underestimate the true incidence.

Robotic versus hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: comparison of two minimally invasive techniques in kidney transplantation

Robot-assisted donor nephrectomy (RDN) is increasingly used due to its advantages such as its precision and reduced learning curve when compared to laparoscopic techniques. Concerns remain among surgeons regarding possible longer warm ischemia time. This study aimed to compare patients undergoing robotic living donor nephrectomy to the more frequently used hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HLDN) technique, focusing on warm ischemia time, total operative time, learning curve, hospital length of stay, donor renal function and post-operative complications. Retrospective study comparing RDN to HLDN in a collaborative transplant network. 176 patients were included, 72 in RDN and 104 in HLDN. Left-sided nephrectomy was favored in RDN (82% vs 52%, p < 0.01). Operative time was longer in RDN (287 vs 160 min; p < 0.01), while warm ischemia time was similar (221 vs 213 secs, p = 0.446). The hospital stay was shorter in RDN (3.9 vs 5.7 days, p < 0.01).Concerning renal function, a slightpersistent increase of 7% of the creatinine ratio was observed in the RDN compared to the HLDN group (1.56 vs 1.44 at 1-month checkup, p < 0.01). The results show that RDN appears safe and efficient in comparison to the gold-standard HLDN technique. Warm ischemia time was similar for both techniques, whereas RDN operative time was longer. Patients undergoing RDN had a shorter hospital stay, this being possibly mitigated by differences in center release criteria. Donor renal function needs to be assessed on a longer-term basis for both techniques.

Safety and Intraoperative Results in Live Kidney Donors with Vascular Multiplicity After Hand-Assisted Laparoscopy Living Donor Nephrectomy.

Background and PurposeVascular multiplicity is the most frequent anatomic variation in kidney donors. Despite concerns about risks, these allografts are increasingly used to overcome the shortage of kidney donors. The safety and clinical outcomes in living kidney donors were evaluated with vascular multiplicity after hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALDN).Patients and MethodsData from all living kidney donors who underwent HALDN from 2008 to 2021 was retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups as single (SRV) and multiple renal vessels (MRV), and a comparative analysis was done. The primary outcomes include operating room time (ORT), days of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, complications, conversion, and re-operations.ResultsMRV were present in 166 out of 612 donors (27.1%). Among those, 10 (1.6%) donors had simultaneous multiple arteries and veins. Additionally, the prevalence of artery and vein multiplicity was 21.8% (n = 134) and 3.5% (n = 22), respectively. Warm ischemia time was significantly different among the two groups but not clinically important. The number of conversions to open technique, the mean ORT, the median blood loss, and days of hospital stay were similar between the SRV and MRV groups, without significant differences. According to the modified Clavien-classification system, no differences were found in the complication rates between the two groups (p = 0.29). Complication rates were 3.3% and 3.6% for the SRV and MRV groups, respectively.ConclusionHALDN is a procedure with safe intraoperative results, even with vascular multiplicity. The presence of multiple renal arteries or veins has no negative impact on the outcome of the donor after living donor nephrectomy.

Midline Rotation of the Right Renal Hilum During Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy.

Background/Objectives:Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN) of the right kidney is currently considered as part of standard of care; however, dealing with the renal hilum when performing ligation/division of its renal vessels is still a main concern. Here, we describe a simple-to-perform technique, i.e., flipping the fully mobilized right kidney to the midline so that the renal artery becomes anteriorly, which offers better visualization and easier dissection of the renal vessels (achieving maximized lengths) when performing hand-assisted LLDN of the right kidney.Methods:Living donors who underwent hand-assisted LLDN of the right kidney, along with their respective renal transplant recipients, were included in this report. Donor characteristics included renal artery and vein lengths; recipient characteristics included creatinine at months 12 – 36. Graft vein and arterial anastomosis data were also reported.Results:Nineteen living donors and 19 recipients, with median donor and recipient ages being 39 (24 – 60) and 53 (3 – 81) years, respectively, were included. None of the 38 patients had intra- or postoperative complications. Donor renal vein was anastomosed to the right external iliac vein (n = 16), right common iliac vein (n = 2), and inferior vena cava (n = 1). Gonadal vein (n = 1) and deceased donor iliac vein (n = 2) were used to increase the right renal vein length in 3 cases. Four donor kidneys had 2 arteries reconstructed side by side. None of the recipients developed any vascular or urological complications.Conclusions:The laparoscopic technique described is safe and allows better visualization of the right hilum, mainly the renal artery, and helps in stapling the renal vein and renal artery.

Effect of rectus sheath block vs. spinal anaesthesia on time-to-readiness for hospital discharge after trans-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: A randomised trial.

The role of spinal anaesthesia in patients having a transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in an enhanced recovery setting has never been investigated. We explored whether substituting a rectus sheath block (RSB) with spinal anaesthesia, as an adjunct to a general anaesthetic technique, influenced time-to-readiness for discharge in patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Prospective randomised open blinded end-point (PROBE) study with two parallel groups. Tertiary University Hospital. Ninety-seven patients undergoing a trans-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Patients (n=52) were randomly assigned to receive a general anaesthetic and a surgical RSB with 2 mg kg-1 of levobupivacaine at the time of surgical closure or a spinal anaesthetic with hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg and diamorphine 0.5 mg (n=45) before general anaesthesia. The primary outcome was the time-to-readiness for discharge following surgery. Median [IQR] times-to-readiness for discharge were 75 [56 to 83] and 79 [67 to 101] h for RSB and spinal anaesthesia and there was no significant difference in times-to-readiness for discharge (median difference 4 (95% CI, 0 to 20h; P = 0.07)). There were no significant differences in pain scores at rest (P = 0.91) or on movement (P = 0.66). Median 24-h oxycodone consumptions were similar (P = 0.80). Nausea and vomiting scores were similar (P = 0.57) and urinary retention occurred in one vs. four patients with RSB and spinal anaesthesia, respectively (P = 0.077). Substitution of RSB with spinal anaesthesia using 12.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine and 0.5 mg diamorphine, together with a general anaesthetic failed to confer any benefit on time-to-discharge readiness following transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. RSB provided similar analgesia in the immediate postoperative period with a low frequency of side-effects in this cohort. ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT02700217.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (HALLDN): Analysis of predictors of favorable perioperative and functional outcomes

Hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (HALLDN): Analysis of predictors of favorable perioperative and functional outcomes

Response to Letter to the Editor RE: Hirose et al., Safety and Efficacy of Retroperitoneoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Comparison of Early Complication, Donor and Recipient Outcome with Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy by Hirose et al. (From: Goyal K, Singh AK, Kumar U, et al. J Endourol 2019;33:503; DOI: 10.1089/end.2019.0099).

Response to Letter to the Editor RE: Hirose et al., Safety and Efficacy of Retroperitoneoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Comparison of Early Complication, Donor and Recipient Outcome with Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy by Hirose et al. (From: Goyal K, Singh AK, Kumar U, et al. J Endourol 2019;33:503; DOI: 10.1089/end.2019.0099).

Safety and Efficacy of Retroperitoneoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Comparison of Early Complication, Donor and Recipient Outcome with Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy.

Laparoscopic surgery has been a standard procedure of living donor nephrectomy (LDN). Transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic LDN (HALDN) has been commonly reported by many centers with excellent outcome. However, there are few studies reporting retroperitoneoscopic LDN (RPLDN). Four hundred four consecutive kidney donors (124 men, 280 women) were enrolled in this study. Age of the donors was 55.0 ± 10.7 years. RPLDN was performed for 294 donors, and HALDN for 110 donors. We compared perioperative donor outcome and early complication rates between RPLDN and HALDN to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RPLDN. Intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in RPLDN than in HALDN (p < 0.05). The conversion rate to open surgery was similar between the two groups. The intraoperative complication rate was 1.0% (two vascular injuries and one bowel injury) in RPLDN and 0.9% (one vascular injury) in HALDN. The postoperative complication rate was 3.4% (six surgical site infections, two postoperative bleeding, one colon perforation, one ileus, one rhabdomyolysis) in RPLDN and 1.8% (two surgical site infections) in HALDN. Although warm ischemic time was significantly longer in RPLDN than in HALDN (p < 0.01), the incidence of delayed graft function was similar between the two groups. Furthermore, there was no difference in 1-year graft survival between the two groups. Both RPLDN and HALDN procedures were well tolerated with minimal complication rates, and both procedures showed similar impact on recipient graft function. These results suggest that RPLDN could be a feasible option for LDN as well as HALDN.

Initial Experience With Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Training and Clinical Practice as a General Surgeon

BackgroundTo analyze our initial results of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy, executed by a skilled gastrointestinal surgeon. MethodsA total of 22 consecutive patients underwent the hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy between December 2014 and January 2017. We retrospectively analyze the patient's perioperative clinical data, which were collected prospectively. ResultsThe right kidney was harvested in 12 patients. The mean operative time and intraoperative blood loss was 241.0 ± 43.4 minutes (range, 140–310 min) and 293.2 ± 203.1 mL (range, 50–700 mL), respectively. The mean warm ischemic time was 288.4 ± 103.4 seconds (range, 179–610 s). Postoperative complications included chyle leakage in 2 patients who were left kidney donors and oliguria in 1 patient who was a right kidney donor. All patients recovered with conservative care, and the mean hospital stay was 7.5 ± 1.7 days. The mean creatinine level was 0.7 ± 0.2 mg/dL before surgery, 1.1 ± 0.3 mg/dL at postoperative day (POD) 1, and 1.0 ± 0.2 mg/dL after discharge. The mean glomerular filtration rate was 97.9 ± 18.2 mL/min/1.73 m2 before surgery, 60.7 ± 10.4 at POD 1, and 67.3 ± 11.1 after discharge. Operation time was not associated with patient body mass index and case number. No significant differences, other than postoperative complications, were found in the perioperative data for the side of kidney donation. ConclusionA skilled surgeon with experience in laparoscopic abdominal surgery (such as gastrectomy or colectomy) might safely perform hand-assisted donor nephrectomy. However, we could not identify a clear case number to complete the learning curve.

Obesity and hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (HALDN): Short and medium term outcomes

Obesity and hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (HALDN): Short and medium term outcomes

Renal vein extension during living-donor kidney transplantation in the era of hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy.

To evaluate retrospectively the clinical outcomes of living-donor kidney transplantations (LDKTs) using renal vein extension (RVE) for donor kidneys with short renal veins. Between January 2007 and December 2010, a total of 576 LDKTs were performed with grafts generated by hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: 31 (5.4%) transplants with RVE and 545 (94.6%) without an additional vascular procedure for renal vein lengthening. Outcomes were compared in patients who did and did not undergo the RVE procedure during transplantation. The 31 transplantation patients that underwent RVE involved procured kidneys with short renal veins: 29 were right-sided kidneys (93.5%) and 2 were left-sided kidneys (6.5%) (P=0.00). The RVE grafts were obtained from allogenic gonadal veins from female donors (n=16, 51.6%) and iliac veins from deceased donors (n=15, 48.4%). There were no postoperative complications related to the RVE procedure. During a follow-up period of 45.6±15.9 months, there were one (3.2%) graft failure among the 31 patients with RVE and four (0.7%) among the 545 patients without RVE. Delayed graft function was noted in one (3.2%) of the RVE patients and 22 (4.0%) of the patients without RVE. There was no statistically significant difference in graft failure (P=0.24) or delayed graft function (P=1.00) between the two groups. During LDKT, donor kidneys with exceptionally short renal veins, which may result in unavoidable tension during renal vein anastomosis, may be modified by RVE, thus facilitating a secure anastomosis and reducing postoperative complications.

Ureteral Complications After Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy

Urological complications, namely ureteral leak and obstruction, remain a major source of morbidity after renal transplantation. Given that the existing literature on ureteral complications pertains mostly to deceased as opposed to living donors, we aimed to assess the risk factors for ureteral complications solely after living donor nephrectomy. We identified 480 consecutive cases of renal transplantation after hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy at our institution from January 2008 to February 2013. We determined the incidence of ureteral complications and assessed the association with a number of perioperative factors, including age, sex, race, and body mass index of both the donor and recipient; arterial and ureteral anatomy; procurement by transplant surgeon versus urologist; history of previous renal transplantations; technique of ureteral anastomosis; use of ureteral stent; total ischemia time; serum creatinine on discharge; and need for temporary posttransplant hemodialysis. Among 480 renal transplantations after living donor nephrectomy, ureteral complications occurred in 18 (3.7%), including ureteral leak in 10 (2.1%) and ureteral stricture in 8 (1.6%). Only two factors were significantly associated with ureteral complications on multivariate analysis: increased donor age and no placement of ureteral stent. Ureteral complications of renal transplants after living donor nephrectomy are uncommon. The use of a ureteral stent is protective against ureteral complications and increased donor age is associated with an increased incidence of ureteral complications.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: initial Glasgow experience

The study presents the early results of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALDN) carried out in West of Scotland from June 2009 to October 2010. The first 20 HALDN procedures carried out in our unit are presented. The outcomes reported are warm ischaemia time, operative time, delayed graft function, recipient renal function and one-month morbidity and mortality of donor and recipient. SPSS 15.0 was used for statistical analysis. The mean age of the donors was 44 ± 10 years, predominantly females (n = 13), median operative time 135 ± 33 min and warm ischaemia time 41 ± 16 s. The length of the incision used was 65 mm in all cases. Duration of hospital stay was 5 ± 1 days. Patient mortality was 0 and morbidity minimal with two donors developing minor wound infection and no other clinically significant postoperative morbidity. Among the recipients, 18/20 (90%) transplants worked primarily with two delayed graft functions, one due to early surgical complications in a small paediatric recipient and one due to recipient renal artery thrombosis. HALDN is safe and associated with minimal morbidity; further analysis aims to confirm excellent cosmetic results and quick return to activity compared with the standard open nephrectomy technique.

Quality of Life after Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy

Background: The laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has become the procedure of choice for living kidney donation in many centers. We report on donor-related quality of life (QoL) and social state after laparoscopic hand-assisted donor nephrectomy (HALDN) for living donation. Patients and methods: Between 2003-2011, a total of 79 hand-assisted living donor nephrectomies had been performed at our institution. For evaluation of QoL, structured questionnaire has been mailed to the donors. The questionnaire was created at our center based on a combination of WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire and the 36-item health survey (SF-36) with slight modifications. The QoL scores were compared to data of German healthy population. Mean follow-up time was 2.45 years. Results: The QoL scores were higher than those of the normal population in all domains. The higher quality of life in donors was independent of time since donation. When asked to rate their health at the time of the questionnaire, 91% rated it as good, very good, or excellent; 6% as fair and 3% as poor. When asked to rate pain around their scar, 91% rated it as mild or absent. 94% of the patients were likely to say they would donate again, if it were possible. For 6% of the patients was the overall experience very stressful. Conclusions: Laparoscopic hand-assisted donor nephrectomy is safe and the QoL changes and risks after kidney donation are low and comparable to that of the healthy population. Further, HALDN has compared with open donor nephrectomy no negative impact on the transplanted graft function.

How Safe and Effective Is Routine Left Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy With Multiple Renal Arteries? A High-Volume, Single-Center Experience

BackgroundWe investigated the safety and effectiveness of routine harvest of the left kidney for renal transplantation regardless of the presence of multiple renal arteries to obtain the longer renal vein. Patients and MethodsBetween February 2000 and July 2008, 325 patients underwent left hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. The true renal arterial anatomy as evaluated intraoperatively was compared with the renal arterial anatomy by computed tomography (CT). We compared the results for the patients with a single renal artery (group I) with the patients with multiple renal arteries (group II) in terms of the donor and recipient outcomes. ResultsMultiple renal arteries in left kidney were identified in 86 patients (26.5%). Thirty-seven CTs (11.4%) were in discord with the renal arterial anatomy evaluated intraoperatively. There was no difference in age, gender, body mass index, estimated blood loss, complication rate, or length of hospital stay between the 2 groups in the donor. Although the warm ischemic time and the operation time were significantly longer in group II (P = .008 and .001), overall graft survival was similar between the groups. ConclusionRoutine harvest of the left kidney can be performed safely and effectively for the donor and recipient, even in the presence of multiple renal arteries.

Hand-assisted retroperitoneal laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with a modified technique

Objective To evaluate the safety,feasibility and results of the hand-assisted retroperitoneal laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy ( HRPLDN ) with a modified technique. Methods Living donors (n =32) were divided into HRPLDN group (n =16) and open group (n =16) according to surgical technique.Operative data and postoperative outcomes including operative time,estimated blood loss,warm ischemia time,length of hospital stay and complication rate,were collected. Results All procedures were completed successfully.In HRPLDN group,the mean operative time was 101.3 ± 21.2 min (range from 70 to 150 min),with an estimated blood loss of 53.8 ±25.5 ml (range from 20 to 100 ml) and warm ischemia time of 2.4 ± 0.6 min ( range from 1.5 to 3.5 min).No living donor needed conversion to open surgery and the urine volume of transplanted kidney after first 24 hours was 5036 ml (range from 3500 -6500 ml).The mean postoperative on bed time were (2.8 ± 0.7 ) d (ranging from 2 -4 d).All parameters of HRPLDN were significantly better than that of open groups. Conclusion Living donor nephrectomy with HRPLDN is a safe and reliable surgical technique. Key words: Laparoscopy ; Hand-assisted; Kidney transplantation ; Nephrectomy

Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Live-Donor Nephrectomy: Introduction of Simple Hand-Assisted Technique (Without Hand Port)

Objective Compared with the transperitoneal approach, retroperitoneal laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy offers a substantial advantage. However, retroperitoneal access is more difficult because of the limited working space. The objective of this study was to report our experience with hand-assisted retroperitoneal laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy without a hand port. Materials and Methods Intraoperative and immediate postoperative surgical outcomes were reviewed for 23 modified retroperitoneal laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomies performed from May 2009 to January 2010. All kidneys were from living related donors. No prisoners or organs from prisoners were used in this study. Results Retroperitoneal laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy was successfully completed in all patients, without conversion to open surgery. Mean (range) operative was 114 (98–130) minutes; warm ischemia time was 1.6 (1.3–2.1) minutes; estimated blood loss was 20 (10–50) mL; and postoperative hospital stay was 6.9 (5–10) days. No serious complications such as massive bleeding or bowel injury occurred. In 1 patient, a hematoma of renal fossa developed, which was successfully treated at repeat operation. All kidneys demonstrated good primary function except 1 that exhibited delayed graft function. Conclusions Retroperitoneal laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy combines the benefits of both hand assistance and the retroperitoneal approach, to minimize the risk of short- and long-term complications associated with the transabdominal approach. The technique could be a cost-effective procedure suitable for use in developing countries.