Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Live Donor Nephrectomy: Evaluation of Health Survey and Graft Functions

Incision length for kidney transplantation does not influence short- or long-term outcome: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

While previous studies suggest advantages of minimally invasive surgery in living donor nephrectomy, similar data are lacking for kidney transplant recipients. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate short- and long-term outcome for kidney transplant recipients, comparing a short transverse (ST) to a classical hockey-stick (HS) incision.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients were randomized into two groups: ST vs. HS from January 2008 to May 2010. ST was defined as incision length ≤9 cm and HS as >14 cm. Perioperative data were collected, with evaluation of intra- and postoperative complications and quality of recovery (QoR) score.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in patient demographics, early or long-term postoperative pain. There were no significant differences in QoR scores between the ST and HS group. Predictive for a worse QoR was persisting incisional pain at the 30-month follow-up. Thirty-days mortality, morbidity, and long-term kidney function did not differ between the two groups (p = 1.00, p = 0.62 and p = 0.66, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient satisfaction as well as graft function and patient mortality was not influenced by incision length. With patient and graft safety being paramount, especially in times of organ shortage, incision length should reflect the requirement for a successful transplantation and not be a measure of feasibility.

Mini-incision right hepatic lobectomy with or without laparoscopic assistance for living donor hepatectomy

Minimally invasive procedures are considered to be safe and effective approaches to the management of surgical liver disease. However, this indication remains controversial for living donor hepatectomy. Between 2000 and 2011, living donor right hepatectomy (LDRH) was performed 58 times. Standard right hepatectomy was performed in 30 patients via a subcostal incision with a midline extension. Minimally invasive procedures began to be used for LDRH in 2008. A hybrid technique (hand-assisted laparoscopic liver mobilization and minilaparotomy for parenchymal dissection) was developed and used in 19 patients. In 2010, an upper midline incision (10 cm) without laparoscopic assistance for LDRH was innovated, and this technique was used in 9 patients. The perioperative factors were compared, and the indications for minimally invasive LDRH were investigated. The operative blood loss was significantly less for the patients undergoing a minimally invasive procedure versus the patients undergoing the standard procedure (212 versus 316 mL, P = 0.001), and the operative times were comparable. The length of the hospital stay was significantly shorter for the minimally invasive technique group (5.9 versus 7.8 days, P < 0.001). The complication rates were 23% and 25% for the standard technique and minimally invasive technique groups, respectively (P = 0.88). Patients undergoing minilaparotomy LDRH had a body mass index (24.0 kg/m(2)) similar to that of the hybrid technique patients (25.8 kg/m(2), P = 0.36), but the graft size was smaller (780 versus 948 mL, P = 0.22). In conclusion, minimally invasive LDRH can be performed without safety being impaired. LDRH with a 10-cm upper midline incision and without laparoscopic assistance may be appropriate for donors with a smaller body mass. Laparoscopic assistance can be added as needed for larger donors. This type of LDRH with a 10-cm incision is innovative and is recommended for experienced centers.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: The Middle East experience

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the experience of the Middle East in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), to discuss the associated advantages and salient problems, to examine the learning curve encountered compared with that of the pioneering centres in the West, and the contribution of the regional centres to the worldwide experience.

METHODS

We searched Medline and PubMed for all centres performing LDN in the Middle East. Questionnaires were e-mailed to the regional transplantation centres, and programme directors, and leading urological and transplant surgeons were contacted by telephone.

RESULTS

LDN in the Middle East was first introduced in 2000; this approach has been pioneered and practised at seven transplant centres within five countries in the region, and was restricted to only three Arab countries, i.e. Lebanon, Egypt and Kuwait. Data collection yielded a total of 888 procedures over one decade, representing only 2% of the total of ≈50,000 transplants during the same period. Despite variability of accurate reporting the overall outcomes were similar to those of open DN. The spectrum of complications was comparable to that from major centres in the USA during their learning curve.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of LDN in the Middle East has been gratifying. The relative hesitancy in introducing LDN in the rest of the Arab Middle East is multifaceted. The advantages conferred to the donor underscore the need for further expansion of this approach for kidney retrieval.