Living Donor Nephrectomy Research Articles

Changing of the guard? A glance at the surgical representation in the Canadian renal transplantation community.

Renal transplant is the gold standard treatment for end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and the prevalence of both ESRD and renal transplant has been steadily increasing over the past decade. However, involvement of urology in renal transplant has been declining. We examine the current state of urology involvement in renal transplant programs across Canada. A telephone survey of all surgical transplant centres in Canada was performed. Information regarding the number of transplant surgeons, their individual training background, and their involvement in specific procedures, including open and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy, deceased donor nephrectomy, and recipient renal transplant were collected. There are 59 Canadian transplant surgeons, including 27 (46%) who completed a urology residency and 32 (54%) with a general surgery background. With regards to procedures performed, 58 (98%) perform recipient renal transplant surgery, 36 (61%) perform laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, and 17 (29%) perform open donor nephrectomy. There was no significant difference in the number of surgeons that perform renal recipient surgery, laparoscopic or open donor nephrectomies, and deceased donor nephrectomies between surgeons of the two different training backgrounds. The role of urology in Canadian renal transplant has declined significantly over the past decade. Given the medical and surgical complexity of renal transplant, along with the growing need for renal transplants, a multidisciplinary team approach is imperative. Strong urology involvement with the transplant team is crucial for optimal care of these complex patients.

Dynamics of Urinary Calprotectin after Renal Ischaemia.

Background: Urinary calprotectin has been identified as a promising biomarker for acute kidney injury. To date, however, the time-dependent changes of this parameter during acute kidney injury remain elusive. The aim of the present work was to define the time-course of urinary calprotectin secretion after ischaemia/reperfusion-induced kidney injury in comparison to neutrophil gelatinase—associated lipocalin, thereby monitoring the extent of tubular damage in nephron sparing surgery for kidney tumours. Methods: The study population consisted of 42 patients. Thirty-two patients underwent either open or endoscopic nephron sparing surgery for kidney tumours. During the surgery, the renal arterial pedicle was clamped with a median ischaemic time of 13 minutes (interquartile range, 4.5–20.3 minutes) in 26 patients. Ten retro-peritoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy patients and 6 nephron sparing surgery patients in whom the renal artery was not clamped served as controls. Urinary calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase—associated lipocalin concentrations were repeatedly measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and assessed according to renal function parameters. Results: Urinary concentrations of calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase—associated lipocalin increased significantly after ischaemia/reperfusion injury, whereas concentrations remained unchanged after nephron sparing surgery without ischaemia/reperfusion injury and after kidney donation. Calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase—associated lipocalin levels were significantly increased 2 and 8 hours, respectively, post-ischaemia. Both proteins reached maximal concentrations after 48 hours, followed by a subsequent persistent decrease. Maximal neutrophil gelatinase—associated lipocalin and calprotectin concentrations were 9-fold and 69-fold higher than their respective baseline values. The glomerular filtration rate was only transiently impaired at the first post-operative day after ischaemia/reperfusion injury (p = 0.049). Conclusion: Calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase—associated lipocalin can be used to monitor clinical and sub-clinical tubular damage after nephron sparing surgery for kidney tumours. Urinary calprotectin concentrations start rising within 2 hours after ischaemia/reperfusion-induced kidney injury.

Calculating Additional Risk of Concomitant Laparoscopic Surgery in Living Kidney Donors: Cholecystectomy in Combination with Living Donor Nephrectomy

Background: During the evaluation of a donor candidate for living kidney donation, occasionally a concomitant benign abdominal disease is diagnosed. Combining organ donation and surgical treatment of that disease could be beneficial to the donor. This paper quantified the additional risk to the donor if the two operations were combined. Study design: The clinical database of 155 academic medical centers and affiliated hospitals of University HealthSystem Consortium was used to predict the minimum expected surgical risk of a combined laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Results: Our model predicted that a minimum of 8.64% of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at the same time as a donor nephrectomy would experience at least one complication. This represents an increase of 2.3% (relative risk=1.24) from the 6.34% risk for patients undergoing only the cholecystectomy. Conclusion: The estimation of increased risk is a necessary step to obtain informed consent from a donor offered or who wants to undergo multiple procedures simultaneously.

Successful technical tradition of retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy to the next generation

Successful technical tradition of retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy to the next generation

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed simultaneously with retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy

Aim: To evaluate safety of simultaneous Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and Retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy (RPLDN). Materials and Methods: We have retrospectively reviewed 400 patients who have undergone RPLDN. Ten patients underwent a combination of RPLDN and LC. Ten patients underwent a combination of RPLDN and LC. Results: Mean operative time was 141.1 ± 27.47 min (range 95-170 min), with a mean estimated blood loss (EBL) of 61.1 ± 18.33 mL (range 30-80 mL). No blood transfusions were required. No short- or long-term complications were found. Mean hospital stay was 2.6 ± 0.84 days (range 2-4 days). Mean follow-up period was 1.8 ± 0.71 years (range 1-3 years). Conclusion: From our results, we conclude that simultaneous RPLDN and LC are safe.

Rare combined variation of left suprarenal vessels associated with retroaortic left renal vein

Suprarenal vascular variations should be known to surgeons performing laparoscopic adrenalectomy, partial nephrectomy, living donor nephrectomy and renal transplantation. A rare case of vascular variation of the left suprarenal gland was observed, in which the left suprarenal vein was draining into the inferior vena cava after crossing the abdominal aorta anteriorly, just below the origin of the superior mesenteric artery. The left inferior suprarenal artery was originating from the left gonadal artery, which originated from the abdominal aorta in front of the left renal artery. Besides this, the left renal vein passed obliquely downwards behind the abdominal aorta and drained into the inferior vena cava. The retroaortic left renal vein may lead to unilateral hematuria, left varicocele and could be a cause of infertility in men.

Neutrophil-Gelatinase Associated Lipocalin (N-GAL) to Assess Perioperative Acute Kidney Injury in Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Pilot Study

Abstract Perioperative insults, including hypotension, hypovolaemia and pneumoperitoneum may occur during laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. These may have deleterious effects to both donor and recipient. The extent and significance of these insults is poorly understood and difficult to quantify. The aim of this study was to evaluate acute kidney injury (AKI) in the donor using the novel biomarker neutrophil-gelatinase associated lipocalin (N-GAL). We report the results of a pilot study of 20 patients undergoing hand-assisted live donor nephrectomy. eGFR and serum NGAL measurements (Triage CardioRenal Panel, Alere) were obtained preoperatively, immediately post-operatively, day 1 and 6 weeks post-operatively. Mean pre-operative eGFR was 105.6+/-10.1ml/min/1.73m2. Mean eGFR 6 weeks postoperatively demonstrated a 29.4+/-8.8% reduction from baseline. Serum N-GAL increased by 34.1+/-16.7% following an overnight fast pre-operatively (day 0) (ΔNGAL 45.1+/-36.0ng/ml), by a further 14.9+/-7.2% following surgery (immediate post-op). The largest ΔNGAL was observed during the pre-operative fasting period. ΔNGAL [day -1 to day 0] and [day -1 to post-op] were found to correlate inversely with eGFR at 6 weeks (p<0.05, r2=0.47 and p<0.001, r2=0.52 respectively). We conclude that clinically significant AKI does occur in the donor following live donor nephrectomy. Optimisation of perioperative fluid management is likely to have a protective role.

Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy and Cytokine Changes

BackgroundLaparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (LDN) exerts systemic effects causing transaminitis and increased urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalm (NGAL) excretion. Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, which tends to be shorter with less pneumoperitoneum, may be hypothesized to produce less systemic stimulation than total laparoscopic LDN. MethodsSerial urine and serum samples were collected from 15 patients undergoing HALDN. Samples were analyzed for NGAL and kidney injury molecule 1 (KIM-1) levels preoperatively and 24 hours post-surgery. Data relating to alanine aminotransferase, creatinine, and estimated glomerular filtration rate was also analyzed in 48 live donors preoperatively and at 24 hours and 48 hours post-surgery and compared to published data on LDN. ResultsExpected changes to creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rates were observed in the donors. Compared to the preoperative levels, alanine aminotransferase levels showed a significant decrease at 24 hours (P = .004) and were not significantly different from baseline levels at 48 hours (P = .08). Serum KIM-1 and NGAL levels remained unchanged (P = .89 and P = .14, respectively) at 24 hours after donation. Similarly, urinary levels of KIM-1 and NGAL were not statistically significantly different after donation. Mean operating time for this cohort was 1 hour, 36 minutes. ConclusionsIn contrast to other published data, our cohort did not exhibit changes to liver function tests or biomarker changes after donor nephrectomy. This could be because of the lower operative time (96 minutes vs. 216 minutes) or because of the intermittent release of the pneumoperitoneum in the hand-assisted method which may exert less of a systemic inflammatory response.

Meta-analysis of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy versus standard laparoscopic technique for living donor nephrectomy

Meta-analysis of hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy versus standard laparoscopic technique for living donor nephrectomy

More than a decade after live donor nephrectomy: a prospective cohort study.

Previously reported short-term results after live kidney donation show no negative consequences for the donor. The incidence of new-onset morbidity takes years to emerge, making it highly likely that this will be missed during short-term follow-up. Therefore, evidence on long-term outcome is essential. A 10-year follow-up on renal function, hypertension, quality of life (QOL), fatigue, and survival was performed of a prospective cohort of 100 donors. After a median follow-up time of 10years, clinical data were available for 97 donors and QOL data for 74 donors. Nine donors died during follow-up of unrelated causes to donation, and one donor was lost to follow-up. There was a significant decrease in kidney function of 12.9ml/min (P<0.001) at follow-up. QOL showed significant clinically relevant decreases of 10-year follow-up scores in SF-36 dimensions of physical function (P<0.001), bodily pain (P=0.001), and general health (P<0.001). MFI-20 scores were significantly higher for general fatigue (P<0.001), physical fatigue (P<0.001), reduced activity (P=0.019), and reduced motivation (P=0.030). New-onset hypertension was present in 25.6% of the donors. Donor outcomes are excellent 10years post-donation. Kidney function appears stable, and hypertension does not seem to occur more frequently compared to the general population.

Living Donor Hepatectomy: Is it Safe?

Living donor hepatectomy (LDH) is high risk to a healthy donor and remains controversial. Living donor nephrectomy (LDN), conversely, is a common practice. The objective is to examine the outcomes of LDH and compare this risk profile to LDN. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried for hepatectomies and nephrectomies from 1998 to 2011. LDH or LDN were identified by donor ICD-9 codes. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality and complications. Bivariate analysis compared nondonor hepatectomy or nondonor nephrectomy (NDN). Multivariate analyses adjusted for baseline organ disease, malignancy, or benign lesions. There were 430 LDH and 9211 nondonor hepatectomy. In-hospital mortality was 0 and 6 per cent, respectively (P < 0.001); complications 4 and 33 per cent (P < 0.001). LDH had fewer complications [odds ratio (OR) 0.15 (0.08-0.26)]. There were 15,631 LDN and 117,966 NDN. Mortality rates were 0.8 per cent LDN and 1.8 per cent NDN (P < 0.001). Complications were 1 and 21 per cent (P < 0.001). LDN had fewer complications [OR 0.06 (0.05-0.08)] and better survival [OR 0.32 (0.18-0.58)]. Complication rates were higher in LDH than LDN (4% vs 1%, P < 0.001), but survival was similar (0% vs 0.8% mortality, P = 0.06). In conclusion, morbidity and mortality rates of LDH are significantly lower than hepatectomy for other disease. This study suggests that the risk profile of LDH is comparable with the widely accepted LDN.

Neutrophil-gelatinase associated lipocalin (N-GAL) to assess perioperative acute kidney injury in hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A pilot study

IntroductionThe aim of this study was to evaluate donor acute kidney injury (AKI) using a novel biomarker (NGAL). MethodologyA pilot study of 20 patients undergoing hand-assisted live donor nephrectomy was undertaken. eGFR and serum NGAL measurements were obtained pre-operatively, immediately post-operatively, day 1 and 6 weeks post-operatively. ResultsMean age: 40.6±11.1 years. Mean pre-operative eGFR: 105.6±10.1ml/min/1.73m2. Mean day 1 post-op eGFR: 65.7±10.4ml/min/1.73m2 (37.7±9.2% reduction from baseline). Mean eGFR 6 weeks post-operatively was 74.1±8.6ml/min/1.73m2 (29.4±8.8% reduction from baseline). Serum NGAL increased by 34.1±16.7% following an overnight fast pre-operatively (day 0) (ΔNGAL 45.1±36.0ng/ml), by a further 14.9±7.2% following surgery (post-op) and a further 3.1±1.2% by post-operative day 1. The largest ΔNGAL was observed during the pre-operative fasting period. ΔNGAL [day −1 to day 0] and [day −1 to post-op] were found to correlate inversely with eGFR at 6 weeks (p<0.05, r2=0.47 and p<0.001, r2=0.52, respectively). ConclusionSignificant AKI occurs with live donor nephrectomy. This is difficult to quantify using standard biochemistry due to the overwhelming effect of nephrectomy on eGFR. AKI is associated with poorer donor eGFR at 6 weeks. Pre-operative hypovolaemia plays a role in AKI. Optimisation of perioperative fluid management is likely to have a protective role.

Kidney Paired Donation Protocol for Participating Donors 2014.

Kidney Paired Donation Protocol for Participating Donors 2014.

Minilaparoscopy vs. standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: comparison of safety, efficacy and cosmetic outcomes in a randomized clinical trial.

This study was conducted to compare safety, efficacy and cosmetic outcome between standard laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (sLDN) and mini-laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (mLDN) in a randomized clinical trial. From March 2012 to June 2013, 100 consecutive kidney donors were randomly assigned to two equal groups for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. mLDN: Six to eight centimeters Pfannenstiel incision was made slightly above pubis symphysis and 11 millimeters trocar was fixed through exposed fascia using open technique. Five mm port was placed under direct vision at the umbilicus for camera insertion and two 3.5 mm ports were placed in subxiphoid and paraumbilical area. sLDN: Ten mm port was placed at umbilicus using open access technique for camera insertion. Five mm trocar for grasping and 11 mm trocar for vascular clipping were placed at subxiphoid and paraumbilical areas under direct vision, respectively. The second 5 mm trocar was placed in suprapubic area. Cosmetic appearance was assessed three months after surgery by using the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ). Demographic data of the patients was not significantly different between two groups. Total operative time and ischemic time was nearly similar in both groups (104 ± 21 vs. 114 ± 24 min; P = .327 and 4.03 vs. 4.07 min; P = .592). There were no cases of conversion to open surgery. Mean hospital stay was similar between the two groups [2.1 (2-5) vs. 2.4 (2-5) days; P = .346]. Kidney graft function assessed by serum creatinine val­ues (mg/dL) of recipients, was equivalent in both groups (1.58 vs. 1.86: P = .206). Mean appearance score (34 vs. 29) and consciousness score (22 vs. 18) in PSAQ showed significantly better results in the mLDN group. Our experience in this study revealed that peri- and post-operative findings were comparable between sLDN and mLDN, but mLDN has significant better cosmetic appearance than standard laparoscopic approach.

Noncontrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Versus Computed Tomography Angiography in Preoperative Evaluation of Potential Living Renal Donors

Living renal donors undergo an extensive examination program. These examinations should be as safe, gentle, and patient friendly as possible. To compare computed tomography angiography (CTA) and an extensive magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol without contrast agents to observations from nephrectomy in living renal donors and to evaluate whether noncontrast-enhanced MRI can replace CTA for vessel assessment in living renal donors. CTA and MRI results were compared to observations from nephrectomy, which served as the reference standard. Fifty-one potential kidney donors underwent imaging, and 31 donated a kidney. Comparisons in sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were made with respect to the number of arteries, early branching, and the number of veins. Agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa. The exact McNemar's test was used to test for statistically significant differences. In the assessment of more than one renal artery, the sensitivity and specificity of MRI and CTA were high and in perfect agreement compared to observations from surgery. The results for both MRI and CTA were as follows: (sensitivity 100%/specificity100%/accuracy 100%/Kappa = 1/P = 1). When comparing the ability to test for early branching we found, MRI: (sensitivity 33%/specificity 100%/accuracy 87%/Kappa = 0.45/P = 1) and CTA: (sensitivity 50%/specificity 100%/accuracy 90%/Kappa = 0.62/P = 1). When used to depict supernumerary veins, we found MRI: (sensitivity60%/specifivity100%/accuracy 93%/Kappa = 0.72/P = 1), whereas CTA showed: (sensitivity 40%/specificity 96%/accuracy 87% Kappa = 0.43/P = 1). In conclusion, an optimized MRI protocol that includes noncontrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography can be substituted for CTA for preoperative assessment of the renal vessels before living donor nephrectomy.

When Opportunity Knocks Twice: Dual Living Kidney Donation, Autonomy and the Public Interest.

Living kidney transplantation offers the best treatment in terms of life‐expectancy and quality of life for those with end‐stage renal disease. The long‐term risks of living donor nephrectomy, although real, are very small, with evidence of good medium‐term outcomes. Who should be entitled to donate, and in which circumstances, is nevertheless a live question. We explore the ethical dimensions of a request by an individual to donate both of their kidneys during life: ‘dual living kidney donation’. Our ethical analysis is tethered to a hypothetical case study in which a father asks to donate a kidney to each of his twin boys. We explore the autonomy of the protagonists, alongside different dimensions of the public interest, such as the need to protect not only the recipients, but also the donor and even the wider community.Whilst acknowledging objections to ‘dual‐donation’, not least by reference to the harms that the donor might be expected to endure, we suggest there is a prima facie case for permitting this, provided that both donor and recipients are willing and that due attention is paid to such considerations as the autonomy and welfare of all parties, as well as to the wider ramifications of acting on such a request. We argue for broader interpretations of the concepts of autonomy and welfare, recognizing the importance of relationships and the relevance of more than merely physical well‐being. Equipped with such a holistic assessment, we suggest there is a prima facie case for allowing ‘dual living kidney donation’.

Vascular Management During Live Donor Nephrectomy: An Online Survey Among Transplant Surgeons

In 2006, a survey from the American Society of Transplant Surgeons disclosed significant and sometimes fatal hemorrhagic events in live donor nephrectomies (LDN) related to failure of clips, leading to the contraindication of the Weck® Hem-o-lok® clip for control of the renal artery during LDN. A survey regarding vascular control techniques, their perceived safety ratings and their failures was sent to 645 European Society for Organ Transplantation members who profiled their profession as "surgeon" and selected "kidney" as organ type. Two hundred forty-three (41%) members responded, of whom 171 (63.3%) independently perform LDN. Their responses were analyzed. For arterial and venous vascular control, the GIA™ and TA™stapler are used most frequently, and were rated the safest. Of the 121 reported hemorrhagic events, slippage and dislodgement of clips occurred at least 58 times, while stapler malfunction occurred at least 40 times. One donor death from hemorrhage related to clip dysfunction was reported. Hemorrhagic complications of LDN with fatal and non-fatal outcomes still occur. Strikingly, many surgeons do not use the vascular closing technique that they consider most safe. Failure of non-transfixion techniques is associated with greater risks for the donor. Control of major vessels in LDN must employ transfixion techniques for optimal donor safety.

Kidney Laterality and the Safety of Hand-assisted Live Donor Nephrectomy: Review of 1000 Consecutive Cases at a Single Center

To determine the feasibility of performing right-sided, hand-assisted, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) and compare with the results of left-sided surgeries in both donors and recipients. Between September 2006 and September 2013, 1000 consecutive patients underwent HALDN at our institution. Patient characteristics and the intraoperative or postoperative parameters of the donors and recipients were retrospectively evaluated. Preoperative data, including relative renal function, vascular anatomy, and parenchymal abnormalities, were evaluated to determine the reasons for harvesting the right kidney. Intraoperative and postoperative data, including pneumoperitoneum time, warm ischemia time, complications, chronic kidney disease stage, and graft function, were compared between donors and recipients who underwent right- and left-sided procurement. Mean follow-up period was 21 months in donor and 42 months in recipient. Right-sided HALDN was performed on 421 patients (42.1%). The most common reasons for selecting the right kidney was reduced right kidney function (53.4%) followed by multiple left renal arteries (34.2%). None of 1000 patients required conversion to open surgery or developed major complications. Serum creatinine concentrations and chronic kidney disease stage at the last follow-up examinations were similar in donors. There were no significant differences in graft function and ureter-related complications between right- and left-sided kidneys at the last follow-up examination. Right-side HALDN is a safe procedure. The donor side can be freely selected using HALDN to benefit both donors and recipients.

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

Perioperative outcome and female sexual function after laparoscopic transvaginal NOTES-assisted nephrectomy.

There is a concern about the impact that this surgery could have on a patient's sexuality, although this has not been well documented. The objective of our study is to describe the surgical results and assess sexual function and patient satisfaction after transvaginal NOTES-assisted laparoscopic radical and living donor nephrectomy. Between March 2008 and October 2014, 100 women underwent transvaginal NOTES-assisted nephrectomy (78 living donor and 22 radical nephrectomy) in our centre. The procedure was performed using two different techniques depending on the indication as described previously, but using the same vaginal approach. Variables evaluated were operative time, blood loss, intra-operative complications, hospital stay, satisfaction, first-month creatinine and warm ischaemia time in donors. Sexual function was assessed with the Female Sexual Function Index questionnaire before and after surgery. All variables were accrued in a prospective database. The procedure was completed in all cases. Mean age and body mass index was higher in the radical nephrectomy group. Mean operative time and hospital stay were similar for both techniques. All sexually active women reported unaltered sexual function after surgery and satisfaction with the results. The pre- and post-FSFI scores for living donor (n = 54) and radical nephrectomy (n = 4) were 27.47 ± 1.02/27.27 ± 1.10 (p > 0.05) and 31.17 ± 0.81/31.87 ± 0.97 (p > 0.05). Transvaginal NOTES-assisted or hybrid NOTES nephrectomy offers a safe technique with excellent cosmetic results and no sexual effect. Despite promising results, randomized controlled studies with longer follow-up are warranted to further elucidate the potential of this novel technique.