Literature DB >> 17334861

Complications after a 5-year experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: the Indiana University experience.

C P Sundaram1, G L Martin, A Guise, J Bernie, V Bargman, M Milgrom, A Shalhav, M Govani, W Goggins.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is becoming the standard of care for living donor nephrectomy. However, questions have been raised about the safety of LDN for the donor and about the potentially increased rates for ureteral complications experienced by the recipient. In this report, the authors review their 5-year experience with 253 living laparoscopic donor nephrectomies.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for 253 laparoscopic live donors. Graft function and survival were compared using recipient postoperative creatinine values up to 12 months.
RESULTS: The overall rate of complications in the investigated series was 10.3%. There were seven intraoperative complications (2.8%), three of which required open conversion. There were 19 postoperative complications (7.5%), three of which required reexploration for bleeding. The majority of complications were minor including 62% grade 1, 8% grade 2, 31% grade 3, and no grade 4 or 5 complications. There were no intraoperative complications in the right-sided donor group. There was a 5% complication rate for patients with a body mass index (BMI) exceeding 25. The findings showed that 11.2% of the recipients had slow graft function, and 4.4% had delayed graft function. Less than 1% of the recipients experienced ureteral stricture requiring permanent stent placement or reoperation. Overall, there was a 2% graft loss rate.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings show a low rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications, most of which were minor complications. There was an increase in operative time and hospital stay in the right-sided group, but no increase in complication rate. There was no significant difference in outcome or complication rate for the overweight patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17334861     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-006-9176-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   3.453


  11 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.  Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: the first randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  N Simforoosh; A Bassiri; S A M Ziaee; A Tabibi; N S Salim; F Pourrezagholi; S M M H Moghaddam; R Maghsoodi; H Shafi
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 1.066

3.  Fatal and nonfatal hemorrhagic complications of living kidney donation.

Authors:  Amy L Friedman; Thomas G Peters; Kenneth W Jones; L Ebony Boulware; Lloyd E Ratner
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Obesity in living kidney donors: clinical characteristics and outcomes in the era of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  Julie K Heimbach; Sandra J Taler; Mikel Prieto; Fernando G Cosio; Stephen C Textor; Yogish C Kudva; George K Chow; Michael B Ishitani; Timothy S Larson; Mark D Stegall
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 8.086

5.  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

6.  Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy: comparing ureteral complications in the recipients and improving the laparoscopic technique.

Authors:  B Philosophe; P C Kuo; E J Schweitzer; A C Farney; J W Lim; L B Johnson; S Jacobs; J L Flowers; E S Cho; S T Bartlett
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1999-08-27       Impact factor: 4.939

7.  The OPTN/UNOS Renal Transplant Registry 2003.

Authors:  J Michael Cecka
Journal:  Clin Transpl       Date:  2003

8.  Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: the University of Maryland 6-year experience.

Authors:  Stephen C Jacobs; Eugene Cho; Clarence Foster; Peter Liao; Stephen T Bartlett
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy 1997 to 2003: lessons learned with 500 cases at a single institution.

Authors:  Joseph R Leventhal; Burak Kocak; Paolo R O Salvalaggio; Alan J Koffron; Talia B Baker; Dixon B Kaufman; Jonathan P Fryer; Michael M Abecassis; Frank P Stuart
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.982

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
  11 in total

1.  Reliability of a complication classification system for orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  Ernest L Sink; Michael Leunig; Ira Zaltz; Jennifer Claire Gilbert; John Clohisy
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Minimally invasive donor nephrectomy: current state of the art.

Authors:  Nicole M Shockcor; Sam Sultan; Josue Alvarez-Casas; Philip S Brazio; Michael Phelan; John C LaMattina; Rolf N Barth
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  Stratification of standardized TKA complications and adverse events: a brief communication.

Authors:  Richard Iorio; Craig J Della Valle; William L Healy; Keith R Berend; Fred D Cushner; David F Dalury; Jess H Lonner
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Correlations between a dedicated orthopaedic complications grading system and early adverse outcomes in joint arthroplasty.

Authors:  Dorothy Y Harris; Jillian K McAngus; Yong-Fang Kuo; Ronald W Lindsey
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Donor complications following laparoscopic compared to hand-assisted living donor nephrectomy: an analysis of the literature.

Authors:  Whitney R Halgrimson; Jeffrey Campsen; M Susan Mandell; Mara A Kelly; Igal Kam; Michael A Zimmerman
Journal:  J Transplant       Date:  2010-01-06

6.  An acetazolamide based multimodal analgesic approach versus conventional pain management in patients undergoing laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  Rupinder Singh; Indu Sen; Jyotsna Wig; M Minz; Ashish Sharma; Indu Bala
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2009-08

7.  Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: Are ten cases per year enough to reach the quality standards? A report from a single small-volume transplant center.

Authors:  S Saad; A Paul; J Treckmann; A Tarabichi; M Nagelschmidt; W Arns
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-07-25       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Enhanced surgical imaging: laparoscopic vessel identification and assessment of tissue oxygenation.

Authors:  Nicole J Crane; Ben McHone; Jason Hawksworth; Jonathan P Pearl; John Denobile; Doug Tadaki; Peter A Pinto; Ira W Levin; Eric A Elster
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  Perception of surgical complications among patients, nurses and physicians: a prospective cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Milo A Puhan; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Ksenija Slankamenac; Rolf Graf
Journal:  Patient Saf Surg       Date:  2011-11-22

10.  Transperitoneal laparoscopic left versus right live donor nephrectomy: Comparison of outcomes.

Authors:  Shrinivas Rudrapatna Pandarinath; Babulal Choudhary; Harvinder Singh Chouhan; Shivashankar Rudramani; Deepak Dubey
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2014-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.