Literature DB >> 23146499

Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: is there a difference between using a left or a right kidney?

G Tsoulfas1, P Agorastou, D Ko, M Hertl, N Elias, A B Cosimi, T Kawai.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to review the results of 279 laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies (LLDN) regarding outcomes of using the left or the right kidney.
METHODS: Among 279 patients who underwent LLDN between August 1998 and April 2009, 260 underwent a left (group L) and 19, a right (group R) nephrectomy. The two groups were compared regarding intra- and postoperative parameters, including pre- and postoperative renal function, length of surgery, conversion to an open approach, delayed graft function, and complications.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding preoperative glomerular filtration rate (L = 129.5 ± 32 mL/min versus group R = 127.3 ± 26 mL/min), length of surgery (group L = 228 ± 58 minutes versus group R = 226 ± 62 minutes group), postoperative donor creatinine (group L = 1.36 ± 0.9 mg/dL versus group R = 1.48 ± 0.8 mg/dL), conversion to open (group L = 6.6% versus group R = 5.3%), delayed graft function (group L = 7.2% versus group R = 6.3%) and recipient postoperative creatinine at 1 month (group L = 1.54 ± 1.4 mg/dL versus group R = 1.32 ± 1.1 mg/dL). There were three intraoperative donor complications in group L (bleeding in one donor required transfusion), and none in group R. Similarly, there was a great albeit not a significant difference in the number of major postoperative donor complications among group L (n = 16) versus group R (n = 2). The right kidney was chosen because of the number of vessels (n = 5), presence of cysts (n = 5), size and renal function (n = 6), presence of renal stones (n = 2), and tortuous ureter (n = 1). The reasons for conversion to open included bleeding, anatomic issues, and presence of adhesions. It should be noted that during the last 3 years there were no conversions to open, whereas the only conversion among group R was the first case.
CONCLUSIONS: Intra- and postoperative parameters were comparable between the groups. Considering the limitations of the small sample size of right LLDNs in this study, it appears that it is as safe and effective as a left procedure. The learning curve is extremely important, as can be seen by the lack of conversion in the last 3 years.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23146499     DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.09.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transplant Proc        ISSN: 0041-1345            Impact factor:   1.066


  5 in total

Review 1.  Maximizing the donor pool: left versus right laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy--systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nian Liu; Romel Wazir; Jia Wang; Kun-Jie Wang
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2014-03-05       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Laparoscopic vs open donor nephrectomy: Lessons learnt from single academic center experience.

Authors:  Georgios Tsoulfas; Polyxeni Agorastou; Dicken S C Ko; Martin Hertl; Nahel Elias; A B Cosimi; Tatsuo Kawai
Journal:  World J Nephrol       Date:  2017-01-06

3.  Association Between Side of Living Kidney Donation and Post-Transplant Outcomes.

Authors:  Ellen L K Dobrijevic; Eric H K Au; Natasha M Rogers; Philip A Clayton; Germaine Wong; Richard D M Allen
Journal:  Transpl Int       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 3.842

4.  Risk aversion in the use of complex kidneys in paired exchange programs: Opportunities for even more transplants?

Authors:  Garrett R Roll; Matthew Cooper; Jennifer Verbesey; Jeffrey L Veale; Matthew Ronin; William Irish; Amy D Waterman; Stuart M Flechner; David B Leeser
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 9.369

5.  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

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.