+ 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

Safety and Efficacy of Retroperitoneoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Comparison of Early Complication, Donor and Recipient Outcome with Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy

Safety and Efficacy of Retroperitoneoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: Comparison of Early Complication, Donor and Recipient Outcome with Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy

Journal of Endourology 32(12): 1120-1124

Label="INTRODUCTION">Laparoscopic surgery has been a standard procedure of living donor nephrectomy (LDN). Transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic LDN (HALDN) has been commonly reported by many centers with excellent outcome. However, there are few studies reporting retroperitoneoscopic LDN (RPLDN).Label="MATERIALS AND METHODS">Four hundred four consecutive kidney donors (124 men, 280 women) were enrolled in this study. Age of the donors was 55.0 ± 10.7 years. RPLDN was performed for 294 donors, and HALDN for 110 donors. We compared perioperative donor outcome and early complication rates between RPLDN and HALDN to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RPLDN.Label="RESULTS">Intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in RPLDN than in HALDN (p < 0.05). The conversion rate to open surgery was similar between the two groups. The intraoperative complication rate was 1.0% (two vascular injuries and one bowel injury) in RPLDN and 0.9% (one vascular injury) in HALDN. The postoperative complication rate was 3.4% (six surgical site infections, two postoperative bleeding, one colon perforation, one ileus, one rhabdomyolysis) in RPLDN and 1.8% (two surgical site infections) in HALDN. Although warm ischemic time was significantly longer in RPLDN than in HALDN (p < 0.01), the incidence of delayed graft function was similar between the two groups. Furthermore, there was no difference in 1-year graft survival between the two groups.Label="CONCLUSIONS">Both RPLDN and HALDN procedures were well tolerated with minimal complication rates, and both procedures showed similar impact on recipient graft function. These results suggest that RPLDN could be a feasible option for LDN as well as HALDN.

Please choose payment method:

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

Accession: 065910365

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30398366

DOI: 10.1089/end.2018.0669

Related references

Early and late graft function after laparoscopic hand-assisted donor nephrectomy for living kidney transplantation: comparison with open donor nephrectomy. Urologia Internationalis 84(1): 61-66, 2010

Comparison of renal function recovery in donor and recipient after living donor nephrectomy: Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs. open procedures. European Urology Suppl.s 7(3): 195, 2008

Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy superior to laparoscopic nephrectomy. Transplantation Proceedings 35(2): 782-783, 2003

Minimal incision living donor nephrectomy compared to the hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. World Journal of Urology 20(6): 356-359, 2003

Should hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy replace the standard laparoscopic technique for living donor nephrectomy? A meta-analysis. International Journal of Surgery 40: 83-90, 2017

Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: comparable donor/recipient outcomes, costs, and decreased convalescence as compared to open donor nephrectomy. Transplantation Proceedings 33(1-2): 1106-1107, 2001

Comparison of donor, and early and late recipient outcomes following hand assisted and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Journal of Urology 189(2): 618-622, 2013

Effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy in comparison with standard laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. European Urology Suppl.s 16(3): E1755-E1756, 2017

Hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy as an alternative to traditional laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy. American Journal of Transplantation 2(10): 983-988, 2002

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

Outcome of right hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy. Urology 67(3): 496-500; Discussion 500-1, 2006

A randomized clinical trial of living donor nephrectomy: a plea for a differentiated appraisal of mini-open muscle splitting incision and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Transplant International 25(9): 976-986, 2012

Renal vein extension during living-donor kidney transplantation in the era of hand-assisted laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 99(4): 786-790, 2015

Retroperitoneoscopic living related-donor nephrectomy: clinical outcomes of 50 consecutive cases and comparison with open donor nephrectomy. Journal of Endourology 19(7): 808-812, 2005

Kidney transplant outcomes following the introduction of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: a comparison of recipient groups. South African Journal of Surgery. Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif Vir Chirurgie 53(3 and 4): 63-66, 2015