Literature DB >> 24092379

Randomized controlled trial comparing hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

Leonienke F C Dols1, Niels F M Kok, Frank C H d'Ancona, Karel W J Klop, T C Khe Tran, Johan F Langenhuijsen, Türkan Terkivatan, Frank J M F Dor, Willem Weimar, Ine M Dooper, Jan N M Ijzermans.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become the gold standard for live-donor nephrectomy, as it results in a short convalescence time and increased quality of life. However, intraoperative safety has been debated, as severe complications occur incidentally. Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP) is an alternative approach, combining the safety of hand-guided surgery with the benefits of endoscopic techniques and retroperitoneal access. We assessed the best approach to optimize donors' quality of life and safety.
METHODS: In two tertiary referral centers, donors undergoing left-sided nephrectomy were randomly assigned to HARP or LDN. Primary endpoint was physical function, one of the dimensions of the Short Form-36 questionnaire on quality of life, at 1 month postoperatively. Secondary endpoints included intraoperative events and operation times. Follow-up was 1 year.
RESULTS: In total, 190 donors were randomized. Physical function at 1 month follow-up did not significantly differ between groups (estimated difference, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, -4.1 to 7.68; P=0.55). HARP resulted in significantly shorter skin-to-skin time (mean, 159 vs. 188 min; P<0.001), shorter warm ischemia time (2 vs. 5 min; P<0.001) and a lower intraoperative event rate (5% vs. 11%, P=0.117). Length of stay (both 3 days; P=0.135) and postoperative complication rate (8% vs. 8%; P=1.00) were not significantly different. Potential graft-related complications did not significantly differ (6% vs. 13%; P=0.137).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with LDN, left-sided HARP leads to similar quality of life, shorter operating time, and warm ischemia time. Therefore, we recommend HARP as a valuable alternative to the laparoscopic approach for left-sided donor nephrectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24092379     DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e3182a902bd

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transplantation        ISSN: 0041-1337            Impact factor:   4.939


  17 in total

1.  Optimizing a living kidney donation program: transition to hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy and introduction of a passive polarizing three-dimensional display system.

Authors:  Roger Wahba; Robert Kleinert; Martin Hellmich; Nadine Heiermann; Georg Dieplinger; Hans A Schlößer; Denise Buchner; Christine Kurschat; Dirk L Stippel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 4.584

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

Review 3.  Robot-Assisted Transplant Surgery - Vision or Reality? A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Philipp Stiegler; Peter Schemmer
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2018-02-07

4.  KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Care of Living Kidney Donors.

Authors:  Krista L Lentine; Bertram L Kasiske; Andrew S Levey; Patricia L Adams; Josefina Alberú; Mohamed A Bakr; Lorenzo Gallon; Catherine A Garvey; Sandeep Guleria; Philip Kam-Tao Li; Dorry L Segev; Sandra J Taler; Kazunari Tanabe; Linda Wright; Martin G Zeier; Michael Cheung; Amit X Garg
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.939

5.  Transition from laparoscopic to retroperitoneoscopic approach for live donor nephrectomy.

Authors:  Zi Qin Ng; Gabrielle Musk; Alethea Rea; Bulang He
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Laparoscopic nephrectomy for polycystic kidney: comparison of the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches.

Authors:  Thibaut Benoit; Benoit Peyronnet; Mathieu Roumiguié; Grégory Verhoest; Jean-Baptiste Beauval; Arnaud Delreux; Dominique Chauveau; Bernard Malavaud; Andréa Manunta; Michel Soulié; Pascal Rischmann; Karim Bensalah; Xavier Gamé
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  Perianesthetic Management of Laparoscopic Kidney Surgery.

Authors:  Georges Nasrallah; Fouad G Souki
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 3.092

8.  Long-term, self-reported health outcomes in kidney donors.

Authors:  Käthe Meyer; Astrid Klopstad Wahl; Ida Torunn Bjørk; Torbjørn Wisløff; Anders Hartmann; Marit Helen Andersen
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 2.388

9.  Towards a standardised informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy: the PRINCE (Process of Informed Consent Evaluation) project-study protocol for a nationwide prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kirsten Kortram; Emerentia Q W Spoon; Sohal Y Ismail; Frank C H d'Ancona; Maarten H L Christiaans; L W Ernest van Heurn; H Sijbrand Hofker; Arjan W J Hoksbergen; Jaap J Homan van der Heide; Mirza M Idu; Caspar W N Looman; S Azam Nurmohamed; Jan Ringers; Raechel J Toorop; Jacqueline van de Wetering; Jan N M Ijzermans; Frank J M F Dor
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  LOng-term follow-up after liVE kidney donation (LOVE) study: a longitudinal comparison study protocol.

Authors:  Shiromani Janki; Karel W J Klop; Hendrikus J A N Kimenai; Jacqueline van de Wetering; Willem Weimar; Emma K Massey; Abbas Dehghan; Dimitris Rizopoulos; Henry Völzke; Albert Hofman; Jan N M Ijzermans
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2016-02-01       Impact factor: 2.388

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.