+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

First prize: Standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy: a randomized comparative study



First prize: Standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy: a randomized comparative study



Journal of Endourology 25(3): 365-370



The purpose of this study was to compare in a randomized fashion the clinical outcomes following standard laparoscopic and laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) donor nephrectomies. Fifty voluntary renal donors who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized to standard laparoscopic (group A) and LESS (group B) donor nephrectomies. The primary end point of the study was patients' postoperative pain. The clinical outcomes, patient's quality of life, body image, and cosmetic scores on follow-up were also compared. The operating times were similar in both groups (175.83 ± 47.57 vs. 172.20 ± 38.33 minutes, p = 0.38). The surgeon's difficulty as measured using a visual analog scale was significantly more in group B in 4 of 10 defined steps. The postoperative patient pain scores were similar till 48 hours following surgery (3.84 ± 1.68 vs. 3.68 ± 0.75, p = 0.33), but following which the patients in group B had improved pain scores (2.08 ± 0.91 vs. 1.24 ± 0.72, p = 0.0004). Analgesic requirements were similar in both groups (p = 0.47). The warm ischemia times in group B (5.11 ± 1.01 vs. 7.15 ± 1.84 minutes, p < 0.0001) were longer but the total ischemia times in both groups were similar (62.55 ± 9.46 vs. 62.71 ± 12.14 minutes, p = 0.48). All grafts had on-table urine output in the recipient. Intraoperative (8% vs. 16%, p = 0.2) and postoperative complications (20% vs. 16%, p = 0.99) in both groups were comparable. The patients in group B had shorter hospital stay (4.56 ± 0.82 vs. 3.92 ± 0.76 days, p = 0.003). There was no graft loss in either group except for one recipient in group A who sustained sudden cardiac death. The estimated glomerular filtration rates of recipients at 1 year were comparable for both groups (80.87 ± 22.12 vs. 81.51 ± 29.01 mL/minute, p = 0.46). The donor's quality of life, body image, and cosmetic scores were comparable for both groups. In this select group of donors, LESS donor nephrectomy, although challenging to the surgeon with longer warm ischemic times, gave early pain relief with shorter hospital stay and comparable graft function.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 053250608

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 21198375

DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0250


Related references

Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-DN) versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016(5): Cd010850, 2016

Comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy and conventional laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: donor and recipient outcomes. Urology 78(6): 1332-1337, 2011

Laparoendoscopic single-site Pfannenstiel versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Journal of Endourology 24(3): 429-432, 2010

Successful introduction of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy after experience with laparoscopic single-site plus-one trocar donor nephrectomy. Journal of Endourology 29(4): 435-442, 2015

First Canadian experience with robotic laparoendoscopic single-site vs. standard laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: A prospective comparative study. Canadian Urological Association Journal 12(11): E440-E446, 2018

A randomized, prospective, parallel group study of laparoscopic versus laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy for kidney donation. American Journal of Transplantation 14(7): 1630-1637, 2014

A randomized, prospective study of laparoendoscopic single-site plus one-port versus mini laparoscopic technique for live donor nephrectomy. World Journal of Urology 36(4): 585-593, 2018

Novel method of laparoendoscopic single-site and natural orifice specimen extraction for live donor nephrectomy: single-port laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and transvaginal graft extraction. Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research 90(2): 111-115, 2016

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy vs Standard Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study. Journal of Endourology 29(12): 1334-1340, 2015

Comparison of Cosmesis and Body Image After Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy. Transplantation Proceedings 48(3): 729-733, 2016

Comparison of complications of laparoscopic versus laparoendoscopic single site donor nephrectomy using the modified Clavien grading system. Journal of Urology 186(4): 1386-1390, 2011

Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison study in the canine model. Techniques in Urology 5(3): 174-178, 1999

Pfannenstiel laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) vs conventional multiport laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Bju International 112(5): 616-622, 2013

Can right-sided hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy be advocated above standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a randomized pilot study. Transplant International 27(2): 162-169, 2014

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus standard laparoscopic simple nephrectomy: a prospective randomized study. Journal of Endourology 24(8): 1315-1320, 2010