Literature DB >> 33521044

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: The University of Florence Technique.

Sergio Serni1,2, Alessio Pecoraro1, Francesco Sessa1,2, Luca Gemma1, Isabella Greco1, Paolo Barzaghi1, Antonio Andrea Grosso1, Francesco Corti1, Nicola Mormile1, Pietro Spatafora1, Simone Caroassai1, Alessandro Berni1, Mauro Gacci1, Saverio Giancane1, Agostino Tuccio1, Arcangelo Sebastianelli1, Vincenzo Li Marzi1, Graziano Vignolini1, Riccardo Campi1,2.   

Abstract

Objective: To provide a step-by-step overview of the University of Florence technique for robotic living donor nephrectomy (LDN), focusing on its technical nuances and perioperative outcomes.
Methods: A dedicated robotic LDN program at our Institution was codified in 2012. Data from patients undergoing robotic LDN from 2012 to 2019 were prospectively collected. All robotic LDNs were performed by a highly experienced surgeon, using the da Vinci Si robotic platform in a three-arm configuration. In this report we provide a detailed overview of our surgical technique for robotic LDN. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of the technique, including perioperative surgical complications rate and mid-term functional outcomes.
Results: Overall, 36 patients undergoing robotic LDNs were included in the study. Of these, 28 (78%) were left LDNs. Median (IQR) donor pre-operative eGFR was 88 (75.6-90) ml/min/1.73 m2. In all cases, robotic LDN was completed without need of conversion. The median (IQR) overall operative time was 230 (195-258) min, while the median console time was 133 (IQR 117-166) min. The median (IQR) warm ischemia time was 175 (140-255) s. No intraoperative adverse events or 90-d major surgical complications were recorded. At a median (IQR) follow-up of 24 months (IQR 11-46), median (IQR) eGFR patients undergoing in living donor nephrectomy was 57.4 (47.9; 63.9) ml/min/1.73 m2. Conclusions: In our experience, robotic LDN is technically feasible and safe. The use of robotic surgery for LDN may provide distinct advantages for surgeons while ensuring optimal donors' perioperative and functional outcomes.
Copyright © 2021 Serni, Pecoraro, Sessa, Gemma, Greco, Barzaghi, Grosso, Corti, Mormile, Spatafora, Caroassai, Berni, Gacci, Giancane, Tuccio, Sebastianelli, Li Marzi, Vignolini and Campi.

Entities:  

Keywords:  kidney transplantation; living donor nephrectomy; minimally invasive surgery; robotics; technique

Year:  2021        PMID: 33521044      PMCID: PMC7844329          DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.588215

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Surg        ISSN: 2296-875X


  4 in total

1.  Two- and three-dimensional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparative study of a single-center experience.

Authors:  Myltykbay Rysmakhanov; Asset Yelemessov; Nadiar Mussin; Daulet Yessenbayev; Samat Saparbayev; Bazylbek Zhakiyev; Yerlan Sultangereyev
Journal:  Korean J Transplant       Date:  2022-06-13

Review 2.  Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: Is it getting ready for prime time?

Authors:  Vincenzo Li Marzi; Alessio Pecoraro; Maria Lucia Gallo; Leonardo Caroti; Adriano Peris; Graziano Vignolini; Sergio Serni; Riccardo Campi
Journal:  World J Transplant       Date:  2022-07-18

3.  Associations between Advanced Glycation End Products, Body Composition and Mediterranean Diet Adherence in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Authors:  Josipa Radić; Marijana Vučković; Andrea Gelemanović; Ela Kolak; Dora Bučan Nenadić; Mirna Begović; Mislav Radić
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-09-04       Impact factor: 4.614

4.  Robot-Assisted Autonomous Reduction of a Displaced Pelvic Fracture: A Case Report and Brief Literature Review.

Authors:  Yufeng Ge; Chunpeng Zhao; Yu Wang; Xinbao Wu
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-14       Impact factor: 4.241

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.