Literature DB >> 11884697

Living kidney donation: a comparison of laparoscopic and conventional open operations.

J R Waller1, A L Hiley, E J Mullin, P S Veitch, M L Nicholson.   

Abstract

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has the potential to lessen the burden placed on live kidney donors. This study describes the first British comparison of donor morbidity and recovery following conventional open donor nephrectomy (ODN) and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). An initial series of LDN (n=20) was compared to a historical control group of ODN (n=34). Laparoscopic operations were performed via a transperitoneal approach, the kidney being removed through a 6--12 cm Pfannensteil incision. Open operations were performed using a retroperitoneal flank approach with resection of the 12th rib. Postoperatively, donors were managed with a patient controlled analgesia system. LDN was associated with shorter mean (SD) inpatient stay (6 (2) v 4 (1) days; p=0.0001) and lower parenteral narcotic requirements (morphine 179 (108) v 67 (54) mg; p=0.0001). Laparoscopic donors started driving their cars sooner (2 (1.5) v 6 (4) weeks; p=0.0001) and returned to work more quickly (5 (3) v 12 (6) weeks; p=0.0001) than open nephrectomy donors. There were no differences in recipient serum creatinine levels at three months post-transplant but two recipients of transplant kidneys retrieved laparoscopically (10%) developed ureteric obstruction, whereas this complication did not occur after ODN (p=0.13). LDN is associated with less postoperative pain and a substantial improvement in donor recovery times. It is not yet clear whether or not the outcome of the recipient kidney transplants are the same after ODN and LDN and much more experience is required before the place of this new technique can be defined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11884697      PMCID: PMC1742295          DOI: 10.1136/pmj.78.917.153

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Postgrad Med J        ISSN: 0032-5473            Impact factor:   2.401


  14 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: the four year Johns Hopkins University experience.

Authors:  L E Ratner; R A Montgomery; L R Kavoussi
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.992

2.  Two hundred one consecutive living-donor nephrectomies.

Authors:  D Shaffer; A I Sahyoun; P N Madras; A P Monaco
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1998-04

3.  A comparison of recipient renal outcomes with laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  J M Nogueira; C B Cangro; J C Fink; E Schweitzer; A Wiland; D K Klassen; J Gardner; J Flowers; S Jacobs; E Cho; B Philosophe; S T Bartlett; M R Weir
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1999-03-15       Impact factor: 4.939

4.  The use of spiral computed tomography in the evaluation of living donors for kidney transplantation.

Authors:  E J Alfrey; G D Rubin; P C Kuo; J A Waskerwitz; J D Scandling; M W Mell; R B Jeffrey; D C Dafoe
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1995-02-27       Impact factor: 4.939

5.  Elevated intra-abdominal pressure and renal function.

Authors:  P K Harman; I L Kron; H D McLachlan; A E Freedlender; S P Nolan
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1982-11       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Comparison of open and laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  J L Flowers; S Jacobs; E Cho; A Morton; W F Rosenberger; D Evans; A L Imbembo; S T Bartlett
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Renal effects of CO2 insufflation: oliguria and acute renal dysfunction in a rat pneumoperitoneum model.

Authors:  A J Kirsch; T W Hensle; D T Chang; M L Kayton; C A Olsson; I S Sawczuk
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Assessment of living renal donors with spiral CT.

Authors:  G D Rubin; E J Alfrey; M D Dake; C P Semba; F G Sommer; P C Kuo; D C Dafoe; J A Waskerwitz; D A Bloch; R B Jeffrey
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Randomised, prospective, single-blind comparison of laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A W Majeed; G Troy; J P Nicholl; A Smythe; M W Reed; C J Stoddard; J Peacock; A G Johnson
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1996-04-13       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  L E Ratner; L J Ciseck; R G Moore; F G Cigarroa; H S Kaufman; L R Kavoussi
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1995-11-15       Impact factor: 4.939

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Solid organ transplantation in the 21st century.

Authors:  Cara K Black; Kareem M Termanini; Oswaldo Aguirre; Jason S Hawksworth; Michael Sosin
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-10

2.  [Pararectal mini-incision for strictly retroperitoneal nephrectomy in living kidney donation].

Authors:  A A Schnitzbauer; M Loss; M Hornung; S Farkas; B Krämer; W Wieland; H J Schlitt; A Obed
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Renal Function Recovery in Donors and Recipients after Live Donor Nephrectomy: Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic vs. Open Procedures.

Authors:  Bum Soo Kim; Eun Sang Yoo; Tae-Hwan Kim; Tae Gyun Kwon
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2010-04-20

4.  Pain management in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a review.

Authors:  U Mathuram Thiyagarajan; A Bagul; M L Nicholson
Journal:  Pain Res Treat       Date:  2012-10-23
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.