BACKGROUND: The development of minimally invasive surgical approaches to donor nephrectomy (DN) has been driven by the potential advantages for the donor, with questions remaining about long-term outcomes. METHODS: All living DN performed from June 1963 through December 2014 at the University of Minnesota were reviewed. Outcomes were compared among 4 DN techniques. RESULTS: We performed 4286 DNs: 2759 open DN (ODNs), 1190 hand-assisted (HA) laparoscopic DNs (LDNs), 203 pure LDN (P-LDNs), and 97 robot-assisted-LDN. Laparoscopic DN was associated with an older (P < 0.001) and heavier (P < 0.001) donor population. Laparoscopic DN was associated with a higher probability of left kidney procurement (P < 0.001). All 3 LDN modalities required a longer operative time (P < 0.001); robot-assisted-LDN took significantly longer than HA-LDN or P-LDN. Laparoscopic DN decreased the need for intraoperative blood transfusion (P < 0.001) and reduced the incidence of intraoperative complications (P < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (P < 0.001). However, LDN led to a significantly higher rate of readmissions, both short-term (<30 day, P < 0.001) and long-term (>30 day, P < 0.001). Undergoing HA-LDN was associated with a higher rate of an incisional hernia compared with all other modalities (P < 0.001). For recipients, LDN seemed to be associated with lower rates of graft failure at 1 year compared with ODN (P = 0.002). The odds of delayed graft function increased for kidneys with multiple arteries procured via P-LDN compared with HA-LDN (OR 3 [1,10]) and ODN (OR 5 [2, 15]). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, LDN was associated with decreased donor intraoperative complications and hospital length of stay but higher rates of readmission and long-term complications.
BACKGROUND: The development of minimally invasive surgical approaches to donor nephrectomy (DN) has been driven by the potential advantages for the donor, with questions remaining about long-term outcomes. METHODS: All living DN performed from June 1963 through December 2014 at the University of Minnesota were reviewed. Outcomes were compared among 4 DN techniques. RESULTS: We performed 4286 DNs: 2759 open DN (ODNs), 1190 hand-assisted (HA) laparoscopic DNs (LDNs), 203 pure LDN (P-LDNs), and 97 robot-assisted-LDN. Laparoscopic DN was associated with an older (P < 0.001) and heavier (P < 0.001) donor population. Laparoscopic DN was associated with a higher probability of left kidney procurement (P < 0.001). All 3 LDN modalities required a longer operative time (P < 0.001); robot-assisted-LDN took significantly longer than HA-LDN or P-LDN. Laparoscopic DN decreased the need for intraoperative blood transfusion (P < 0.001) and reduced the incidence of intraoperative complications (P < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (P < 0.001). However, LDN led to a significantly higher rate of readmissions, both short-term (<30 day, P < 0.001) and long-term (>30 day, P < 0.001). Undergoing HA-LDN was associated with a higher rate of an incisional hernia compared with all other modalities (P < 0.001). For recipients, LDN seemed to be associated with lower rates of graft failure at 1 year compared with ODN (P = 0.002). The odds of delayed graft function increased for kidneys with multiple arteries procured via P-LDN compared with HA-LDN (OR 3 [1,10]) and ODN (OR 5 [2, 15]). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, LDN was associated with decreased donorintraoperative complications and hospital length of stay but higher rates of readmission and long-term complications.
Authors: Aaron Fleishman; Khalid Khwaja; Jesse D Schold; Carly D Comer; Paul Morrissey; James Whiting; John Vella; Liise K Kayler; Daniel Katz; Jody Jones; Bruce Kaplan; Martha Pavlakis; Didier A Mandelbrot; James R Rodrigue Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2020-04-12 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Mary Amanda Dew; Zeeshan Butt; Qian Liu; Mary Ann Simpson; Jarcy Zee; Daniela P Ladner; Susan Holtzman; Abigail R Smith; Elizabeth A Pomfret; Robert M Merion; Brenda W Gillespie; Averell H Sherker; Robert A Fisher; Kim M Olthoff; James R Burton; Norah A Terrault; Alyson N Fox; Andrea F DiMartini Journal: Transplantation Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Moira H D Bruintjes; Andries E Braat; Albert Dahan; Gert-Jan Scheffer; Luuk B Hilbrands; Frank C H d'Ancona; Rogier A R T Donders; Cornelis J H M van Laarhoven; Michiel C Warlé Journal: Trials Date: 2017-03-04 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Khaled Abdulla Telha; Mohamed Abdullah Al Kataa; Khaled Mohamed Al-Kohlany; Tawfik Hassen Al Badany; Ibrahim Hussen Alnono Journal: Turk J Urol Date: 2017-12-01
Authors: Yakup Kulu; Beat P Müller-Stich; Omid Ghamarnejad; Elias Khajeh; Georgios Polychronidis; Mohammad Golriz; Felix Nickel; Laura Benner; Philipp Knebel; Markus Diener; Christian Morath; Martin Zeier; Markus W Büchler; Arianeb Mehrabi Journal: Trials Date: 2018-07-13 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Maximilian Brunotte; Sebastian Rademacher; Justine Weber; Elisabeth Sucher; Andri Lederer; Hans-Michael Hau; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Daniel Seehofer; Robert Sucher Journal: Ann Transl Med Date: 2020-03