Robotic kidney transplantation from deceased donors: A single-center experience

From Carrel to Robotics: Renal Transplantation and the Evolution of its Surgical Technique

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Renal transplantation has become the standard of care for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to significant advancements across various medical and surgical fields. This review highlights the evolution of renal transplantation techniques, while also exploring the latest tools and practices that promise to further improve their outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the first successful renal transplant, numerous innovations have been implemented in the various stages of renal graft implantation. These include improved techniques in vascular and urinary anastomoses, graft positioning, and the recent emergence of modern technologies such as robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) which have shown promise in enhancing surgical performance. The field of renal transplantation is continuously evolving. As new and more efficient technologies continue to emerge, these too will become the standard of care and training. It is essential for transplant surgeons to understand the key historical developments that have led to our current level of expertise, so we can make effective use of these tools in further advancing the field.

Robotic kidney transplantation

Kidney transplantation is the best treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease owing to improved survival and quality of life compared with dialysis. The surgical approach to kidney transplantation has been somewhat stagnant in the past 50 years, with the open approach being the only available option. In this scenario, evidence of reduced surgery-related morbidity after the introduction of robotics into several surgical fields has induced surgeons to consider robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) as an alternative approach to these fragile and immunocompromised patients. Since 2014, when the RAKT technique was standardized thanks to the pioneering collaboration between the Vattikuti Urology Institute and the Medanta hospital (Vattikuti Urology Institute-Medanta), several centres worldwide implemented RAKT programmes, providing interesting results regarding the safety and feasibility of this procedure. However, RAKT is still considered an alternative procedure to be offered mainly in the living donor setting, owing to various possible drawbacks such as prolonged rewarming time, demanding learning curve, and difficulties in carrying out this procedure in challenging scenarios (such as patients with obesity, severe atherosclerosis of the iliac vessels, deceased donor setting, or paediatric recipients). Nevertheless, the refinement of robotic platforms through the implementation of novel technologies as well as the encouraging results from multicentre collaborations under the umbrella of the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section are currently expanding the boundaries of RAKT, making this surgical procedure a real alternative to the open approach.

Analyzing the Impact of CIT on the Largest Reported Cohort of Robotic Kidney Transplantation From the Deceased Donors

Background

Robotic-assisted kidney transplant (RAKT) has proven to be a successful approach for patients with morbid obesity and more centers are encouraged to apply robotic approach also for deceased donor kidney transplantation. Prolonged cold ischemia time (CIT) is accompanied by delayed graft function (DGF) and early graft loss after traditional open kidney transplant (OKT). This study examines the impact of CIT after robotic kidney transplantation on settings of deceased donation.

Methods

We present a single-center retrospective analysis of 115 cases of RAKT and 128 cases of OKT from deceased donors performed from deceased donor from 2009 to July 2022. Cohort was divided in 3 groups based on CIT ("high" CIT > 15 h, n = 43; "medium" CIT 11-15 h, n = 38; "low" CIT< 11 h, n = 40). The subgroup analysis of DGF and CIT was performed.

Results

The median CIT in the cohort was 13.46 (7) h, and overall rate of DGF was 30.6%. The correlation between CIT and DGF was statistically significant (P = 0.008), and DGF negatively correlated with 1-y graft survival (P = 0.04). The rate of DGF was significantly different between the groups (P = 0.05).

Conclusions

Results from our study demonstrate that the effect of CIT on DGF in settings of RAKT follows a similar pattern as in traditional OKT.

Access to robotic assisted kidney transplant for recipients: a systematic review and call for reporting standards

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) is a relatively novel, minimally invasive option for kidney transplantation. However, clarity on recipient selection in the published literature is lacking thereby significantly limiting interpretation of safety and other outcomes. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesize the data on selection of RAKT recipients, compare the synthesized data to kidney transplant recipients across the USA, and explore geographical clusters of availability of RAKT. Systematic literature review, in accordance with PRISMA, via OVID MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of science from inception to March 5, 2023. All data entry double blinded and quality via Newcastle Ottawa Scale. 44 full-text articles included, encompassing approximately 2402 kidney transplant recipients at baseline but with considerable suspicion for overlap across publications. There were significant omissions of information across studies on patient selection for RAKT and/or analysis. Overall, the quality of studies was very low. Given suspicion of overlap across studies, it is difficult to determine how many RAKT recipients received living (LD) versus deceased donor (DD) organs, but a rough estimate suggests 89% received LD. While the current RAKT literature provides preliminary evidence on safety, there are significant omissions in reporting on patient selection for RAKT which limits interpretation of findings. Two recommendations: (1) international consensus is needed for reporting guidelines when publishing RAKT data and (2) larger controlled trials consistently reporting recipient characteristics are needed to clearly determine selection, safety, and outcomes across both LD and DD recipients.

Successful robotic kidney transplantation for surgeons with no experience in minimally invasive surgery: a single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Robotic kidney transplantation (RKT) is a novel and welcomed innovation yielding good surgical outcomes. However, data on the feasibility and safety of performing RKT by surgeons with a lack of prior minimally invasive surgery (MIS) experience are limited. The authors aimed to evaluate the surgical and functional results of RKT and present the learning curves (LC) of RKT by a single surgeon with no prior experience in MIS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all RKT performed between November 2019 and April 2023 at Severance Hospital in Seoul, South Korea. The authors analyzed surgical and functional outcomes, as well as complication rates of RKT in comparison to open kidney transplantation (OKT). The authors evaluated LCs using the cumulative summation method to describe the number of cases associated with the competency of a single surgeon.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients who underwent RKT and 104 patients who underwent OKT were included in this study. In RKT group, the median surgical console time was 193 min (interquartile range, 172-222) and the median vascular anastomoses time was 38 min (35-44). Total operation time was 323 min (290-371) and rewarming time was 62.5 min (56.0-70.0) in RKT group compared to 210 min (190-239) and 25 min (21-30), respectively, in OKT group. Despite extended surgical durations with a robotic technique, both groups had comparable intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as renal function. Estimated blood loss and post-transplant hospital stays were significantly lower in RKT group than in OKT group. LC analysis of RKT by the single surgeon revealed that surgical competence was achieved after 15 cases.

CONCLUSION

Even if surgeons do not have prior experience with MIS, they can rapidly overcome the LC and safely perform RKT with adequate preparation and acquisition of basic robotic surgical techniques.

Living donor robotic-assisted kidney transplant compared to traditional living donor open kidney transplant. Where do we stand now? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Renal transplant is the standard of care for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Robotic-assisted kidney transplant (RAKT) has emerged as a safe minimally invasive approach with a lower complication rate than open kidney transplant (OKT). Concerns regarding ischemia times and graft function are still a matter of debate.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines and PROSPERO registration CRD42023413774, a systematic review was performed in March 2023 on RAKT compared to OKT. Primary outcomes of interest were surgical times, ischemia times, blood loss, complication rates, and graft function. Data were analyzed using R version 4.2.2.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies comparing living donor RAKT to living donor OKT were included, totaling 1477 patients, out of which 508 underwent RAKT and 969 OKT. RAKT cases were highly selected as depicted in the manuscript. Cumulative analysis showed significantly longer total ischemic time (MD = 16.51; 95% CI = [9.86-23.16]) and rewarming ischemia time (MD = 11.24; 95% CI = [-0.46-22.01]) in RAKT group. No differences were found in total procedure time and time to complete anastomoses. Blood loss and transfusion rate were lower in RAKT group (MD = -53.68; 95% CI = [-89.78; -17.58]) and (RR = 0.29; 95% CI = [0.14; 0.57]), respectively. The meta-analysis revealed a lower rate of surgical site infection (SSI) (RR = 0.31; 95% CI = [0.19-0.52]) and symptomatic lymphocele (RR = 0.16; 95% CI = [0.06-0.43]) in RAKT. No difference in ileus rate was found. Pain scores were significantly lower in the RAKT group (MD = -1.14; 95% CI = [-1.59 - -0.69]; p ≤0.01). No difference in length of stay and hospital readmission were evidenced. Delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection rates were not different between interventions groups (RR =1.23; 95% CI = [0.40-3.74]) and (RR =0.96; 95% CI = [0.55-1.70]), respectively. No difference between groups in early graft outcomes are evident.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that RAKT is a minimally invasive, safe, and feasible procedure. It is associated with a lower complication rate and similar intraoperative, perioperative, and postoperative outcomes. Further quality studies are needed to confirm these findings.

The First Entirely 3D-Printed Training Model for Robot-assisted Kidney Transplantation: The RAKT Box

Background

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) is increasingly performed at selected referral institutions worldwide. However, simulation and proficiency-based progression training frameworks for RAKT are still lacking, making acquisition of the RAKT-specific skill set a critical unmet need for future RAKT surgeons.

Objective

To develop and test the RAKT Box, the first entirely 3D-printed, perfused, hyperaccuracy simulator for vascular anastomoses during RAKT.

Design setting and participants

The project was developed in a stepwise fashion by a multidisciplinary team including urologists and bioengineers via an iterative process over a 3-yr period (November 2019-November 2022) using an established methodology. The essential and time-sensitive steps of RAKT were selected by a team of RAKT experts and simulated using the RAKT Box according to the principles of the Vattituki-Medanta technique. The RAKT Box was tested in the operating theatre by an expert RAKT surgeon and independently by four trainees with heterogeneous expertise in robotic surgery and kidney transplantation.

Surgical procedure

Simulation of RAKT.

Measurements

Video recordings of the trainees' performance of vascular anastomoses using the RAKT Box were evaluated blind by a senior surgeon according to the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) and Assessment of Robotic Console Skills (ARCS) tools.

Results and limitations

All participants successfully completed the training session, confirming the technical reliability of the RAKT Box simulator. Tangible differences were observed among the trainees in both anastomosis time and performance metrics. Key limitations of the RAKT Box include lack of simulation of the ureterovesical anastomosis and the need for a robotic platform, specific training instruments, and disposable 3D-printed vessels.

Conclusions

The RAKT Box is a reliable educational tool to train novice surgeons in the key steps of RAKT and may represent the first step toward the definition of a structured surgical curriculum in RAKT.

Patient summary

We describe the first entirely 3D-printed simulator that allows surgeons to test the key steps of robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) in a training environment before performing the procedure in patients. The simulator, called the RAKT Box, has been successfully tested by an expert surgeon and four trainees. The results confirm its reliability and potential as an educational tool for training of future RAKT surgeons.