OBJECTIVES: To describe our experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and open donor nephrectomy (ODN) regarding ureteral complications. LDN has proved to be safe and to offer significant benefits to the donor compared with ODN. Of major importance is the effect of the surgical technique on the graft. Studies have shown an increased incidence of ureteral complications in recipients of laparoscopically procured kidneys. Operative reconstruction results in additional morbidity for the recipient. METHODS: Living donors and their recipients, who underwent surgery from January 1994 to April 2002, were included in this retrospective study. A total of 122 LDN and 77 ODN recipients were included. RESULTS: Of the 122 LDN and 77 ODN recipients, 15 (12%) and 10 (13%), respectively, required percutaneous nephrostomy drainage. In total, 5 LDN (4.1%) and 5 ODN (6.5%) recipients required reconstruction of the ureter because of obstruction of the ureter or urine leakage (P value not statistically significant, excluding reconstruction required for technical errors). The operating time, warm ischemia time, and serum creatinine were comparable between recipients with or without ureter complications requiring reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, LDN was not associated with an increased incidence of ureteral complications in the recipient compared with ODN.
OBJECTIVES: To describe our experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and open donor nephrectomy (ODN) regarding ureteral complications. LDN has proved to be safe and to offer significant benefits to the donor compared with ODN. Of major importance is the effect of the surgical technique on the graft. Studies have shown an increased incidence of ureteral complications in recipients of laparoscopically procured kidneys. Operative reconstruction results in additional morbidity for the recipient. METHODS: Living donors and their recipients, who underwent surgery from January 1994 to April 2002, were included in this retrospective study. A total of 122 LDN and 77 ODN recipients were included. RESULTS: Of the 122 LDN and 77 ODN recipients, 15 (12%) and 10 (13%), respectively, required percutaneous nephrostomy drainage. In total, 5 LDN (4.1%) and 5 ODN (6.5%) recipients required reconstruction of the ureter because of obstruction of the ureter or urine leakage (P value not statistically significant, excluding reconstruction required for technical errors). The operating time, warm ischemia time, and serum creatinine were comparable between recipients with or without ureter complications requiring reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, LDN was not associated with an increased incidence of ureteral complications in the recipient compared with ODN.
Authors: M Giessing; T F Fuller; S Deger; J Roigas; M Tüllmann; L Liefeldt; K Budde; T Fischer; B Winkelmann; D Schnorr; S A Loening Journal: Urologe A Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Martin C Igbokwe; Olalekan O Olatise; Stephen O Asaolu; Abayomi A Aremu; Sadiq Abu; Uzodinma Onwuasoanya; Adefola R Adetunbi; Sani Alhassan Journal: Cureus Date: 2022-05-22
Authors: T Sinha; P P Varma; A Srivastava; S C Karan; A S Sandhu; G S Sethi; R Khanna; R Talwar; V Narang Journal: Med J Armed Forces India Date: 2011-07-21
Authors: Tomasz Golabek; Anna Szymanska; Tomasz Szopinski; Jakub Bukowczan; Mariusz Furmanek; Jan Powroznik; Piotr Chlosta Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract Date: 2013-11-21 Impact factor: 2.260