Literature DB >> 23228097

Another option for laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: a single center experience comparing two-port versus hand-assisted technique.

Hyuk Jin Cho1, Yong Sun Choi, Woong Jin Bae, Jang Ho Bae, Sung-Hoo Hong, Ji Youl Lee, Sae Woong Kim, Tae-Kon Hwang, Yong-Hyun Cho.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of two-port laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (TPLDN) vs hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between November 2010 and March 2012, 100 kidney donors scheduled for left nephrectomy were alternatively assigned to HALDN or TPLDN in a 1:1 fashion. All procedures were performed by the same laparoscopic surgeon. Demographic data and intraoperative and early postoperative data were collected prospectively and analyzed.
RESULTS: There was no difference in the operating time (133±12 vs 142±17 min, P=0.07), blood loss (55±46 vs 58±52 mL, P=0.84), complication rate (10% vs 12%, P=0.74), and length of hospital stay (3.8±0.8 vs 4.1±2.8 days, P=0.5) between the HALDN and TPLDN groups. The warm ischemia time was longer in the TPLDN group (2.2±0.7 vs 3.5±0.9 min, P<0.001). No statistically significant differences were found in the analgesic requirement and the visual analog pain scores. There was a trend toward quicker return to 100% recovery in the TPLDN group (60±46 vs 39±15 days, P=0.05). The TPLDN group had a significantly smaller surgical incision (8.2±0.6 vs 5.5±0.4 cm, P<0.001) and higher scar satisfaction score (7.8±1.5 vs 8.6±1.3, P=0.02) than the HALDN group. No differences were found in the recipient serum creatinine values or in the incidence of delayed graft function.
CONCLUSIONS: In comparing TPLDN and HALDN, there was no significant difference in a majority of the operative and postoperative parameters. TPLDN might be associated with smaller surgical incision, improved cosmetic satisfaction, and equivalent recipient graft function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23228097     DOI: 10.1089/end.2012.0577

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  4 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Change in renal function following laparoscopic donor nephrectomy using 99 mTc-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid scan.

Authors:  Hyuk Jin Cho; Sae Woong Choi; Woong Jin Bae; Su Jin Kim; Sung Hoo Hong; Ji Youl Lee; Sae Woong Kim; Tae-Kon Hwang
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  A comparison of technique modifications in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Denise M D Özdemir-van Brunschot; Giel G Koning; Kees C J H M van Laarhoven; Mehmet Ergün; Sharon B C E van Horne; Maroeska M Rovers; Michiel C Warlé
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mark P Broe; Rose Galvin; Lorna G Keenan; Richard E Power
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2018-07-07
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.