Literature DB >> 18584179

Complications of retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy: single center experience after 164 cases.

Alexander Bachmann1, Stephen Wyler, Thomas Wolff, Lorenz Gürke, Jürg Steiger, Christoph Kettelhack, Thomas C Gasser, Robin Ruszat.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy (RLDN) is used by only a few centers worldwide. Similar to laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy it offers the donor rapid convalescence and excellent cosmetic results. However, concerns have been expressed over the safety of endoscopic living donor nephrectomy.
METHODS: We review the results of 164 consecutive RLDN from November 2001 to November 2007. Complications were classified into intra- and early postoperative.
RESULTS: Mean donor age was 53.4 +/- 10.7 years (27-79). Left kidneys were harvested in 76% of cases. Mean operation time was 146 +/- 44 min (55-270), and warm ischemia time 131 +/- 45 s (50-280). In two patients (1.2%) conversion to open nephrectomy was necessary. The intraoperative complication rate was 3.0%. In the postoperative period we observed in 17.7% minor complications with no persisting impairments for the donor. The rate of major complications in the early postoperative period was 4.3%. Three patients (1.8%) necessitated revision, due to laceration of the external iliac artery in one patient and chyloretroperitoneum in two patients. Mean donor creatinine was 113.1 +/- 26.6 mg/dl (63-201) on the first postoperative day, and 102.0 +/- 22.2 mg/dl (68-159) on the fifth postoperative day.
CONCLUSION: Retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy can be performed with acceptable intraoperative and early postoperative morbidity. Operation times and warm ischemia times are comparable to the open approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18584179     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-008-0296-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  30 in total

1.  Retroperitoneoscopy-assisted living donor nephrectomy: 109 cases.

Authors:  S C Yang; K H Rha; Y S Kim; S I Kim; K Park
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2001 Feb-Mar       Impact factor: 1.066

2.  Are concerns over right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy unwarranted?

Authors:  D A Goldfarb
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Surgical management of fifty patients with kidney transplants including eighteen pairs of twins.

Authors:  J E MURRAY; J H HARRISON
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1963-02       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy in Germany: impact on donor health-related quality of life and willingness to donate.

Authors:  M Giessing; S Reuter; S Deger; M Tüllmann; I Hirte; K Budde; L Fritsche; T Slowinski; D Dragun; H H Neumayer; S A Loening; B Schönberger
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 1.066

5.  Retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy: donor outcome and complication rate in comparison with three different techniques.

Authors:  Robin Ruszat; Tullio Sulser; Michael Dickenmann; Thomas Wolff; Lorenz Gürke; Thomas Eugster; Igor Langer; Peter Vogelbach; Jürg Steiger; Thomas C Gasser; Christian G Stief; Alexander Bachmann
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2006-01-25       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Reluctance over right-sided retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy: justified or not?

Authors:  R Ruszat; S F Wyler; T Wolff; T Forster; C Lenggenhager; M Dickenmann; T Eugster; L Gürke; J Steiger; T C Gasser; T Sulser; A Bachmann
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.066

7.  Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy: experience from the first 75 consecutive cases.

Authors:  Jonas Wadström
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2005-10-27       Impact factor: 4.939

8.  Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy increases the supply of living donor kidneys: a center-specific microeconomic analysis.

Authors:  P C Kuo; L B Johnson
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2000-05-27       Impact factor: 4.939

9.  Laparoscopic assisted live donor nephrectomy--a comparison with the open approach.

Authors:  L E Ratner; L R Kavoussi; M Sroka; J Hiller; R Weber; P G Schulam; R Montgomery
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1997-01-27       Impact factor: 4.939

10.  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

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Chylous ascites requiring surgical intervention after donor nephrectomy: case series and single center experience.

Authors:  J Aerts; A Matas; D Sutherland; R Kandaswamy
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 8.086

2.  The Learning Curve of Pure Retroperitoneoscopic Donor Nephrectomy.

Authors:  B C Pal; P R Modi; S J Rizvi; R Chauhan; S Kumar; R Nagarajan; D Kaushal; V B Kute; H L Trivedi
Journal:  Int J Organ Transplant Med       Date:  2017-11-01

3.  Chylous ascites after laparoscopic hand-assisted donor nephrectomy: Is it specific for the left-side?

Authors:  S Ter Meulen; K A van Donselaar-van der Pant; F J Bemelman; M M Idu
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2013-01

4.  Hand-assisted living-donor nephrectomy: a retrospective comparison of two techniques.

Authors:  Jeannette D Widmer; Andrea Schlegel; Philipp Kron; Marc Schiesser; Jens G Brockmann; Markus K Muller
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 2.264

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.