PURPOSE: The main aim of the paper is to report a single-centre experience with RAKT, focusing on surgical, perioperative and functional outcomes at a median follow-up of 2.8 years. METHODS: Data of 26 RAKT patients was prospectively collected from December 2014 to February 2019 with follow-up of up to 55 months. All donors were done laparoscopically. We followed Vattikuti-Medanta technique with modification of using pfannenstiel incision instead of Gelpoint and patient positioned in steep Trendelenburg position (30°) with leg split position. Hypothermia was maintained using a "modified graft hypothermia jacket". The engrafted kidney is oriented with the vessels being tagged with Prolene sutures. RESULTS: The mean BMI was 26.1 ± 4.7. The mean warm, cold and total ischemia times were 4.8 ± 1.1, 113.8 ± 20.9 and 118.7 ± 21.2 min, respectively. Mean rewarming time was 62.5 ± 10 min. The mean post-operative day (POD) 1, 3, 7, 30, 6 months, 1 year and most recent creatinine was 3.4, 2.4, 1.8, 1.4,1.2, 1.2 and 1.69 mg/dl. There was no case of delayed graft dysfunction (DGF) with graft survival of 1.8-55 months. The mean GFR at POD 1, 1 month and 1 year was 24, 53.16 and 64.6. We had two intraoperative complications-one topsy turvy graft placement with anastomosis of donor ureter to native ureter and other had to be converted to open technique after anastomosis to control graft surface bleeding. Three postoperative complications-one patient has graft pyelonephritis which was managed conservatively with antibiotics. Two patients had lymphocele. One patient was managed with just aspiration while the other required laparoscopic de-roofing of the lymphocele. The mean hospital stay was 13.5 ± 3 days. CONCLUSIONS: RAKT is feasible and safe only if performed by surgeons with appropriate background in robotic surgery and kidney transplantation after proper surgical training at experienced centres in the mid-term follow-up. Further studies need to confirm the long-term safety of RAKT.
PURPOSE: The main aim of the paper is to report a single-centre experience with RAKT, focusing on surgical, perioperative and functional outcomes at a median follow-up of 2.8 years. METHODS: Data of 26 RAKT patients was prospectively collected from December 2014 to February 2019 with follow-up of up to 55 months. All donors were done laparoscopically. We followed Vattikuti-Medanta technique with modification of using pfannenstiel incision instead of Gelpoint and patient positioned in steep Trendelenburg position (30°) with leg split position. Hypothermia was maintained using a "modified graft hypothermia jacket". The engrafted kidney is oriented with the vessels being tagged with Prolene sutures. RESULTS: The mean BMI was 26.1 ± 4.7. The mean warm, cold and total ischemia times were 4.8 ± 1.1, 113.8 ± 20.9 and 118.7 ± 21.2 min, respectively. Mean rewarming time was 62.5 ± 10 min. The mean post-operative day (POD) 1, 3, 7, 30, 6 months, 1 year and most recent creatinine was 3.4, 2.4, 1.8, 1.4,1.2, 1.2 and 1.69 mg/dl. There was no case of delayed graft dysfunction (DGF) with graft survival of 1.8-55 months. The mean GFR at POD 1, 1 month and 1 year was 24, 53.16 and 64.6. We had two intraoperative complications-one topsy turvy graft placement with anastomosis of donor ureter to native ureter and other had to be converted to open technique after anastomosis to control graft surface bleeding. Three postoperative complications-one patient has graft pyelonephritis which was managed conservatively with antibiotics. Two patients had lymphocele. One patient was managed with just aspiration while the other required laparoscopic de-roofing of the lymphocele. The mean hospital stay was 13.5 ± 3 days. CONCLUSIONS: RAKT is feasible and safe only if performed by surgeons with appropriate background in robotic surgery and kidney transplantation after proper surgical training at experienced centres in the mid-term follow-up. Further studies need to confirm the long-term safety of RAKT.
Authors: Alberto Breda; Angelo Territo; Luis Gausa; Volkan Tuğcu; Antonio Alcaraz; Mireia Musquera; Karel Decaestecker; Liesbeth Desender; Michael Stockle; Martin Janssen; Paolo Fornara; Nasreldin Mohammed; Giampaolo Siena; Sergio Serni; Luis Guirado; Carma Facundo; Nicolas Doumerc Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-09-12 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Volkan Tuğcu; Nevzat Can Şener; Selçuk Şahin; Abdullah H Yavuzsan; Fatih G Akbay; Süheyla Apaydın Journal: BJU Int Date: 2017-10-15 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Angelo Territo; Lluis Gausa; Antonio Alcaraz; Mireia Musquera; Nicolas Doumerc; Karel Decaestecker; Liesbeth Desender; Michael Stockle; Martin Janssen; Paolo Fornara; Nasreldin Mohammed; Giampaolo Siena; Sergio Serni; Selcuk Sahin; Volkan Tuǧcu; Giuseppe Basile; Alberto Breda Journal: BJU Int Date: 2018-05-25 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Maximilian Eisel; Markus J Bader; Frank Strittmatter; Udo Nagele; Christian G Stief; Thomas Pongratz; Ronald Sroka Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-04-10 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Tomas Andri Axelsson; Cecilia Cracco; Mahesh Desai; Mudhar Nazar Hasan; Thomas Knoll; Emanuele Montanari; Daniel Pérez-Fentes; Michael Straub; Kay Thomas; James C Williams; Marianne Brehmer; Palle J S Osther Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-07-29 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Francis Tinney; Tommy Ivanics; Joel Stracke; Lauren Malinzak; Ahmed M Elsabbagh; Tracci McEvoy; Shunji Nagai; Atsushi Yoshida Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2022-04-12