Transperitoneal live donor nephrectomy

Exploring Donors' and Recipients' Attitudes about Living Donor Kidney Transplantation

Context

There is a growing interest in living donor kidney transplantation because of its potential to reduce the current kidney shortage.

Objective

To explore the experience of potential recipients, recipients, potential donors, and donors with regard to living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.

Method

Twenty-five patients participated in a series of focus group interviews. The interviews were tape-recorded and a content analysis was performed.

Results

All participants had a positive attitude toward living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy, though this procedure was not a factor that influenced potential donors' decision to donate a kidney. None of the potential donors and donors felt coerced into giving a kidney; they were motivated by a desire to help a loved one who was suffering. The main perceived impediment to donate a kidney was the potential recipients' reluctance to accept the offer. Potential recipients and recipients found it difficult to ask for a kidney and worried about the consequences of a kidney removal on their donor's health. A potential barrier to living donor kidney transplantation was that recipients would never have accepted a kidney if their donor had to pay for the kidney removal. In addition, recipients believed that a kidney from a non–blood-related donor was not as a good a match as a kidney from a blood-related donor.

Conclusion

This exploratory study reveals that donors, potential donors, recipients, and potential recipients had an overall positive attitude toward living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. This study also sheds light on a number of barriers that have not been previously reported.

Iatrogenic splenectomy during left nephrectomy: a single-institution experience of eight years

INTRODUCTION

Iatrogenic injury to the spleen is not an uncommon complication. Left nephrectomy has been reported as the second commonest cause of iatrogenic splenectomy with a reported incidence between 1.3 and 24%. Iatrogenic splenectomy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

AIMS

We reviewed the occurrence of iatrogenic splenectomy during left nephrectomy at our centre. Our aims were to determine the incidence of iatrogenic splenectomy within the Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust in order to understand the nature of the splenic injury and the morbidity and mortality associated with it.

METHODS

All splenectomy and nephrectomy histology reports from January 2000 to December 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. Indications for splenectomy and nephrectomy were identified. Patients' demographic data, tumour characteristics, operative details, length of hospital stay and any reported morbidity or mortality were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 447 nephrectomies were identified which included 234 left nephrectomies. Within the same period 136 cases of splenectomy were performed. Thirty-four cases were iatrogenic splenectomies and 12 were caused by left nephrectomy. The incidence was 5.13%. The male to female ratio was 1:1 with an average age of 66 years. Grade 2 and stage pT2 renal cancer were the commonest tumour characteristics. All iatrogenic injuries occurred during mobilisation of the colon or division of adhesion. The average operative time was 4.7 h. Average length of hospital stay was 14 days. Five patients had postoperative complications and 1 died of respiratory failure and sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Splenic injury during left nephrectomy is a morbid complication. A good understanding of anatomy and surgical approach may reduce the incidence, morbidity and mortality of iatrogenic splenectomy during left nephrectomy.

Impact of intraoperative heparin on laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE

At many centers systemic heparinization is performed during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy because of concerns regarding graft thrombosis. However, no consensus exists in this regard. We evaluated the impact of intraoperative heparin on donor and recipient outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between September 2000 and February 2003, 79 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic live donor left nephrectomy at our institution. They were sequentially divided into 2 groups, that is group 1-the initial 40 patients who intraoperatively received 5,000 IU heparin intravenously and group 2-subsequent patients who did not receive heparin. The 2 groups were well matched demographically. Data were compared using the paired 2-tailed t test.

RESULTS

The 2 donor groups were comparable in regard to mean blood loss (139 vs 179 cc, p = 0.59), intraoperative urine output (1.6 vs 1.6 l, p = 0.74), warm ischemia time (4 vs 4.2 minutes, p = 0.52), operative time (3.5 vs 3.5 hours, p = 0.97), and cold ischemia time (75 vs 82 minutes, p = 0.38). Complications occurred in 1 patient in group 1 (rhabdomyolysis induced acute renal failure) and in 2 in group 2 (chylous ascites and lumbar vein injury, respectively). No graft was lost due to vascular thrombosis in either group. Recipient immediate, early and delayed (6-month) graft function was comparable between the 2 groups. Acute rejection occurred in 5 recipients in group 1 and 1 in group 2. There was 1 recipient death per group at delayed followup.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine use of heparin during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is not necessary. Because of its potential for causing intraoperative or early postoperative hemorrhage, we no longer routinely administer intraoperative heparin during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy at our institution.

Do multiple renal arteries restrict laparoscopic donor nephrectomy?

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is a new technique. For anatomical and technical reasons, many transplant centers restrict laparoscopic donor nephrectomy to kidneys with a single artery. However, we believe that with increased experience, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in cases of multiple renal arteries does not affect donor or recipient outcomes. Among 115 living related renal transplantations performed between January 1996 and December 2002, 31 nephrectomies were performed via laparoscopy including eight with multiple arteries and 84 via an open approach, including nine with multiple arteries. The 17 patients with multiple arteries at the two procedures were compared in terms of donor and recipient outcomes. All the patients received the same immunosuppressive regimen. The demographic data were similar in the two groups. Mean durations of the donor operations (223 vs 247 minutes), side of nephrectomy (left/right, 5/4 vs 7/1), mean warm ischemia times (230 vs 432 seconds), mean serum creatinine levels at the end of 1 year follow-up, were statistically similar for the open versus the laparoscopy groups. Urological (11.1% vs 25%) and vascular complication rates (22.2% vs 25%), acute rejection rates (11.1% vs 12.5%) were also statistically similar for open versus laparoscopy groups, respectively. One-year patient and graft survival rates were 87.5% for both groups. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy was as safe a procedure as open surgery even in the presence of multiple renal arteries in the hands of experienced transplants surgeons.

Exploring donors' and recipients' attitudes about living donor kidney transplantation

CONTEXT

There is a growing interest in living donor kidney transplantation because of its potential to reduce the current kidney shortage.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experience of potential recipients, recipients, potential donors, and donors with regard to living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.

METHOD

Twenty-five patients participated in a series of focus group interviews. The interviews were tape-recorded and a content analysis was performed.

RESULTS

All participants had a positive attitude toward living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy, though this procedure was not a factor that influenced potential donors' decision to donate a kidney. None of the potential donors and donors felt coerced into giving a kidney; they were motivated by a desire to help a loved one who was suffering. The main perceived impediment to donate a kidney was the potential recipients' reluctance to accept the offer. Potential recipients and recipients found it difficult to ask for a kidney and worried about the consequences of a kidney removal on their donor's health. A potential barrier to living donor kidney transplantation was that recipients would never have accepted a kidney if their donor had to pay for the kidney removal. In addition, recipients believed that a kidney from a non-blood-related donor was not as a good a match as a kidney from a blood-related donor.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study reveals that donors, potential donors, recipients, and potential recipients had an overall positive attitude toward living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. This study also sheds light on a number of barriers that have not been previously reported.

Video-assisted minilaparotomy in urology

Minimally invasive surgery has gained wide acceptance as a method of reducing postoperative pain and curtailing the convalescence period. We have devised a modified surgical technique of video-assisted surgery through minilaparotomy (VAMS). This technique is a hybrid of conventional open and laparoscopic surgery that combines the benefits of both techniques by reducing postoperative pain and scarring, as in laparoscopy, but at the same time maintaining the safety of conventional open surgery. Video-assisted procedures have become standard as a result of our experience with 245 consecutive patients operated on between January 1993 and January 2001. The VAMS is a minimally invasive technique that is safe, feasible, standardized, and reproducible with a short learning curve. This technique can be an alternative to open and laparoscopic surgery in daily urologic practice.

Risks and complications in 160 living kidney donors who underwent nephroureterectomy

BACKGROUND

The rate of living donor renal transplantations has increased. However, in view of the possible complications, the question as to whether the condition of the recipient justifies operation of the donor still remains unanswered. The present retrospective study evaluates the perioperative and post-operative risks and complications for the donor at a single major transplantation centre.

METHODS

From 1994 to 2001, 160 live donor nephroureterectomies were performed. The median age of living donors was 51 years (range 21-77 years); 19 patients were older than 61 years. After confirming blood group compatibility and negative cross-match, donors underwent an extensive medical and psychological examination. Comorbidities and anatomical features of the donor were evaluated and the impact they may have on the outcome was determined. The nephroureterectomies were performed transperitoneally, with the right kidney being preferred. Pre-operative, intraoperative and post-operative complications were documented. Serum creatinine levels as well as new-onset proteinuria or hypertension were used as criteria for assessing long-term renal function.

RESULTS

Complications were observed in 41 donors: 35 were minor and six were major (splenectomy; revisions due to liver bleeding, incarcerated umbilical hernia or infected pancreatic pseudocyst; pneumothorax; and acute renal failure). No patient died. Multiple arteries (14 patients), significant renal artery stenosis (two patients) and additional risk factors (e.g. increased age and previous operations) did not affect the complication rate. In the post-operative follow-up period of 0.5-62 months (mean: 38 months), renal function remained stable in all donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Living donor nephrectomy appears to be a safe intervention in specialized centres, where it entails a low morbidity for the donor. Even in high-risk donors, long-term complications were not observed.

Patients' attitudes about living donor transplantation and living donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

The growing shortage of organs available for transplantation has resulted in an increased use of living donors for kidney transplantation. The laparoscopic nephrectomy is a new procedure used to remove kidneys from donors. The study objective was to explore the attitudes of recipients and donors toward living donor kidney transplantation and the impact of the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on donors' and recipients' acceptance of living donor kidney transplantation.

METHODS

Tailored self-administered questionnaires were mailed to kidney donors, potential donors, recipients and potential recipients who visited the University of Maryland School of Medicine Division of Transplantation between January 1998 and May 2001.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic donor nephrectomy helped recipients and potential recipients with their decision to accept a kidney from a living donor (recipients: 53% strongly agreed, 36% agreed; potential recipients: 42% strongly agreed, 46% agreed). To a lesser extent, the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy assisted donors and potential donors with their decision to donate (donors: 19% strongly agreed, 20% agreed; potential donors: 20% strongly agreed, 20% agreed). Potential recipients and recipients identified 2 barriers to accepting living donor kidney transplantation: they were unwilling to accept a kidney if it meant this would financially burden their donors, and they worried that their donors might succumb to a future kidney problem.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the study found a positive attitude toward living donor kidney transplantation and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. This new surgical procedure seemed to positively influence recipients and potential recipients to accept a kidney. In contrast, it had less impact on donors' and potential donors' willingness to give their kidney.

Renal transplantation: laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy

Laparoscopic nephrectomy is now performed at many centers worldwide. This technique for organ harvesting offers less postoperative pain, quicker convalescence, and an optimal cosmetic result when compared with the traditional open approach. With experience, the laparoscopic technique is accomplished without compromise to donor safety or allograft function, and complications are comparable with the rates in open historic series. Longer operative times and the need for disposable equipment result in greater hospital costs; however, the quicker convalescence permits patients to resume activity sooner, allowing marked cost savings for patients and employers. The laparoscopic technique is associated with a steep learning curve. Launching a successful laparoscopic living donor program requires a dedicated coordinated effort involving physicians, nurses, and hospital administration. The ultimate impact of this technique on the willingness of individuals to donate has not yet been determined.

Obese living kidney donors: short-term results and possible implications

BACKGROUND

Living kidney donation has increased recently as the shortage of cadaveric organs continues. This increase has occurred in part, due to expanded donor criteria, including obese patients. This is a potential concern because obesity is associated with surgical complications, possibly death, and chronic medical problems. To address this concern, we examined the outcome of a large group of obese (ObD) and nonobese living kidney donors (NObD).

METHODS

A total of 107 obese (body mass index> or =27 kg/m2) and 116 nonobese (body mass index<27 kg/m2) living kidney donors donating at a single institution between 1990 and 1996 were studied. Surgical complications, operative duration, and hospital length of stay were assessed. Preoperative blood pressure, serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, protein excretion, fasting glucose, and hemoglobin A1C were measured and first degree relatives with diabetes were identified.

RESULTS

Overall complications were significantly more common in ObD, 16.8 vs. 3.4% (P=0.0012). The majority of complications in the entire cohort, 56%, were wound related and were significantly more common in ObD (P=0.016). There was no significant increase in nonwound-related infections, bleeding, or cardiopulmonary events. There were no deaths or major complications. Operative time was significantly longer in ObD 151+/-30 vs. 141+/-29 min (P<0.05) but hospital duration was no different. Predonation, blood pressure in ObD was significantly higher, (P<0.05) and they more often had a family history of diabetes, 46 vs. 30% (P<0.05) than nonobese donors. Renal function, proteinuria, fasting glucose, or hemoglobin A1C were no different.

CONCLUSION

With prudent selection, the use of obese living kidney donors appears safe in the short term. They experience more minor complications, usually wound related, and slightly longer operations. Given a higher baseline blood pressure and family history of diabetes, the long-term effect on the remaining solitary kidney in ObD needs to be examined.

Transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy for giant hydronephrosis

PURPOSE

We evaluate laparoscopic nephrectomy for giant hydronephrosis with an emphasis on the operative technique of retroperitoneoscopic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During the last 2 years 13 men and 5 women underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy for giant hydronephrosis via a transperitoneal (6) or retroperitoneal (12) approach. The etiology was congenital ureteropelvic junction obstruction in 17 patients and hydronephrosis caused by stone disease in 1. Three patients had a contralateral obstructed kidney. Renal parameters were normal in all patients.

RESULTS

All procedures were successfully completed without the need for conversion to open surgery. Mean operating time was 113.8 minutes (range 70 to 165) and average blood loss was 260 ml. (range 40 to 600). No patient required a blood transfusion. Postoperative recovery was uneventful with an average postoperative hospital stay of only 3.2 days (range 2 to 5).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic nephrectomy is a good alternative to open surgery for giant hydronephrosis and significantly reduced the morbidity of surgery. A retroperitoneal approach is feasible, despite the large amount of retroperitoneal space occupied by these hugely dilated kidneys. Modifications of our technique have been invaluable to the successful outcome in this series.

Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the experience of the laparoscopy working group of the German Urologic Association

PURPOSE

The centers of the laparoscopy working group of the German Urologic Association collected data to prove the efficacy, safety and reproducibility of laparoscopic nephrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

At 14 centers 482 laparoscopic nephrectomies have been performed until December 1996 via a transperitoneal approach in 344 (71%) and a retroperitoneal approach in 138 (29%). All 482 laparoscopic nephrectomies were performed by a total of 20 surgeons with an average of 24 procedures per surgeon (range 4 to 105). The indications for nephrectomy were benign renal pathology in 444 patients (92%), including renovascular disease in 28%, hydronephrosis in 20%, reflux nephropathy in 15%, chronic pyelonephritis in 12%, end stage nephrolithiasis in 11%, renal dysplasia in 4% and renal tuberculosis in 1%. Of the remaining 38 patients (8%) laparoscopic radical nephrectomy was performed for renal cell carcinoma in 5% and for upper tract transitional cell carcinoma in 3%.

RESULTS

Operating time depended mainly on the pathology of the kidney (that is small dysplastic organ versus large hydronephrosis) and the learning curve of the surgeon. However, the average operating time did not vary significantly among the different centers (maximum 277.6 and minimum 81.9 minutes). Intraoperative or perioperative complications were noted in 29 patients (6.0%), including bleeding in 22 (4.6%), bowel injury in 3, hypercarbia in 2 and pleura lesion in 1 and pulmonary embolism in 1. The conversion rate was 10.3% (bleeding, bowel injury, difficult dissection), including 4 patients with renal tuberculosis, 2 with xanthogranulomatous nephritis, and 1 each following renal trauma and embolization. The re-intervention rate was 3.4% due to bleeding in 6 cases, abscess formation in 3, intestinal stenosis in 2 and a pancreatic fistula and port hernia in 1. Mean hospital stay was 5.4 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic nephrectomy has become a well established procedure in those urology departments focusing on laparoscopy. The indications and results are reproducible at these centers. However, for patients with severe perinephritis (that is renal tuberculosis, xanthogranulomatous nephritis, posttraumatic atrophy) a higher likelihood of open conversion must be considered.

Laparoscopic nephrectomy: Mansoura experience with 106 cases

OBJECTIVE

To describe the technique and report our experience of laparoscopic nephrectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between August 1992 and December 1993, 106 patients underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy at the Mansoura Urology and Nephrology Center.

RESULTS

Of the 106 patients, laparoscopic nephrectomy was performed successfully in 97 cases. Conversion to an open procedure was necessary in the remaining nine patients.

CONCLUSION

For a selected group of patients, laparoscopic nephrectomy is a feasible and safe technique. The length of hospital stay and convalescence is short and return to work is rapid.

Laparoscopic nephrectomy: an established routine procedure

Between August 1992 and April 1993, 60 patients underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy in our institution for benign disease (35 hydronephrosis, 20 chronic pyelonephritis, 4 end-stage kidney, 1 renal hypoplasia). Conversion to open surgery was needed in six cases to overcome intraoperative bleeding or perirenal adhesions. The mean operative time was 3.5 +/- 1.3 hours, and the mean hospital stay was 3.2 +/- 2.1 days. No deaths occurred, but significant complications were encountered in four cases in the form of pulmonary embolism, a large hematoma, postoperative bleeding, and colonic perforation. Laparoscopic nephrectomy is a safe and effective alternative to open nephrectomy for benign renal conditions.

Transperitoneal nephrectomy for benign disease of the kidney: a comparison of laparoscopic and open surgical techniques

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the results of laparoscopic nephrectomy for benign disease to open surgical nephrectomy for benign disease.

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic nephrectomy for benign disease were compared with 23 patients undergoing open surgical nephrectomy for benign disease and with 29 patients undergoing a donor nephrectomy. Data were collected in the following areas: patient age, anesthetic risk, operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative time to resume oral intake, parenteral analgesics, oral analgesics, hospital stay, complications, and convalescence. Information was obtained through chart review, telephone interviews, and mailed questionnaires.

RESULTS

Compared with open surgical nephrectomy, laparoscopic nephrectomy resulted in a statistically significant longer operative time; however, it afforded a statistically significant decrease in postoperative ileus (open group), hospital stay (both groups), oral analgesics (donor group), and convalescence (both groups). The incidence of complications was 15 percent in the laparoscopic group and 0 percent in the two open surgical groups; the majority of complications occurred during the initial seven laparoscopic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic nephrectomy is a more time-consuming procedure than open surgical nephrectomy. Also, early in one's experience with this technique, the complication rate is higher than with open surgery. However, despite the newness of the technique, it results in significant benefits to the patient: decreased postoperative pain, shorter hospitalization, and more rapid convalescence.

Laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy

Laparoscopic nephrectomy with ablative intent has been performed clinically. The current study aimed to determine whether a physiologically and anatomically intact kidney suitable for transplantation could be harvested laparoscopically. Three weeks after an ablative laparoscopic right nephrectomy, 15 pigs were divided into two groups: the study group (n = 10) underwent a laparoscopic live-donor left nephrectomy of the solitary kidney and conventional autotransplantation; the control group (n = 5) underwent an open live-donor left nephrectomy of the solitary kidney and conventional autotransplantation. All study kidneys underwent laparoscopic in situ hypothermic perfusion. The mean length of the left renal artery and vein were similar in the study and control groups: 3.1 cm and 3.4 cm, respectively, in the study group compared with 2.5 cm and 3.8 cm, respectively, in the control group (P = 0.5). No intraoperative renal vascular injuries or postoperative ureteral complications were noted in either group. Renal histopathologic examination immediately after live-donor nephrectomy and at 1 month post-transplant showed similar findings in the two groups. The mean serum creatinine at 7 and 30 days postoperatively was not significantly different: 2.1 mg/dL and 1.6 mg/dL, respectively, in the study group and 1.7 mg/dL, and 1.4 mg/dL, respectively, in the control group (P = 0.4). We conclude that laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy can be performed safely and reproducibly in the porcine model.

Preoperative hospitalization to hydrate living kidney donors can be omitted without sacrificing graft function

This prospective study was done to determine whether preoperative hospitalization for hydration of living kidney donors could be omitted without sacrificing graft function in the recipient. The study group consisted of 36 consecutive kidney donors who underwent donation on a "to come in" basis. Fluid management consisted of 1 l. lactated ringer's solution per hour beginning 2 hours preoperatively. The control group was hospitalized preoperatively for intravenous hydration of an equivalent amount of saline solution given for 12 to 16 hours. No recipient of the study group donors experienced delayed graft function. Furthermore, in that group immediate and longer term graft function, as defined by immediate graft output, serum creatinine on postoperative day 1 and nadir serum creatinine levels, was equivalent to or better than that in the control group. We conclude that a rapid infusion of saline solution in the immediate preoperative period can replace overnight intravenous hydration of living kidney donors, and that the result will be a significant reduction in overall hospital stay for the donor without compromise in graft function for the recipient.

Experience with living related donor nephrectomy: Evaluation of 200 cases

Over a ten year period (1979 to 1989), 200 patients have undergone live donor nephrectomy through a flank extraperitoneal approach without rib resection. The average hospital stay was short and the major complications were negligible. Early graft function was seen in 97% of the cases. Delayed function due to acute tubular necrosis developed in 3%. Urinary leak was seen in 3%. Two kidneys were lost due to infection related to urinary fistulate. In 70 donors, 37 +/- 13 month's follow-up was available. Hypertension developed in two patients three and three and one-half years post donation. Significant proteinuria (>300 mg/day) was noted in one patient. No significant renal functional abnormalities were observed. Creatinine clearance was about 70% of the initial measurement at the observation time. We conclude that extraperitoneal flank live donor nephrectomy is generally safe and associated with minimal perioperative and long-term morbidity. Moreover, the procedure provides an excellent allograft function.

Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report

A tumor-bearing right kidney was completely excised from an 85-year-old woman using a laparoscopic approach. A newly devised method for intra-abdominal organ entrapment and a recently developed laparoscopic tissue morcellator made it possible to deliver the 190 gm. kidney through an 11 mm. incision.

Flank donor nephrectomy: efficacy in the donor and recipient

Since August 1983, 115 patients have undergone live donor nephrectomy via an extraperitoneal flank approach with rib resection. Over-all hospital stay was short and morbidity was negligible. Early graft function was excellent as determined by urinary output in the first 20 hours postoperatively (mean 6,442 cc) and low nadir serum creatinine (mean 1.57 mg. per dl.). Acute tubular necrosis or urinary fistula developed in 3 kidneys (2.6 per cent). In the entire series, only 1 graft (0.8 per cent) was lost to technical complications. We conclude that an extraperitoneal flank approach to live donor nephrectomy is safe for the donor, and provides a structurally and functionally sound allograft for the recipient.

Lymphorrhea as postoperative complication of living donor nephrectomy: a case report

We report a case of lymphorrhea after living donor nephrectomy. Clinically the donor presented with an increased flow of a liquid characteristic of lymph, which was treated successfully with iodinated povidone. The possible pathogenic mechanisms implicated in the development of lymphocele following renal transplantation are discussed.

Experience with 247 living related donor nephrectomy cases at a single institution in Japan

There is currently much concern over the morbidity and mortality of donors undergoing nephrectomy for living related renal transplants. Between April, 1970 and July, 1986, 247 cases of living related renal transplants were performed at the Second Department of Surgery, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine. The average age of the donors was 50.3 +/- 9.7 years, 81 per cent of the donors being parents of the recipients. Minor abnormalities which did not affect the donors suitability were found in 71 cases. Nephrectomies were performed extraperitoneally in all cases. Peri-operative complications, including wound complications in 13 cases, urinary infection in 12 cases and pulmonary complications and arrhythmia in 4 cases, were considered to be minor in nature. A variety of renal function tests, carried out two weeks after nephrectomy revealed normal levels, although they had become slightly worse than those estimated pre-operatively. Long-term sequelae in the follow-up period from 18 months to 16 years and 2 months, was studied on 124 donors who answered questionnaires. Currently, there are 5 late deaths, none of which are directly related to the nephrectomy. Of the 124 donors, 85.5 per cent stated that there had been no change in their physical states following surgery. Pain or a feeling of discomfort at the wound site was reported by 10 donors (8.1 per cent) and hypertension was observed only in 3 (2.4 per cent). No major complication directly related to the donor nephrectomy was found, except for one case of incisional hernia.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Living related kidney donors. A 14-year experience

Living related donor (LRD) nephrectomies are controversial due to the risks to the donor and improved cadaveric graft survival using cyclosporine A. Between December 22, 1970, and December 31, 1984, 1096 renal transplants were performed at a single institution, 314 (28.6%) from LRD. The average age was 34.3 years (range: 18-67); none had preoperative hypertension. All nephrectomies were performed transabdominally. Major perioperative complications occurred in 22 (7.0%). These include wound infections (3.5%), pancreatitis (1.0%), injuries to spleen (1.0%) or adrenal gland (0.3%) requiring removal, pneumonitis (0.6%), ulnar nerve palsy (0.6%), femoral artery thrombosis after arteriogram (0.3%), pulmonary embolus (0.3%), and upper pole infarct of contralateral kidney (0.3%). There are six known deaths in this series, none of which were related to the operation. Major late complications were seen in 50 (20.0%) of 250 patients followed for 6 to 175 months (mean 53.1 months). These included definite hypertension (5.6%), suture granuloma (4.4%), incisional hernia (3.6%), proteinuria (2.4%), bowel obstruction (2.0%), nephrolithiasis (1.2%), wound infection (0.4%), scrotal hydrocele (0.4%), and chronic pancreatitis (0.4%). While the risk of hypertension appears to increase as the interval from donation increases, no cases of renal failure after donation have been noted, and negligible proteinuria among those followed long-term has been seen in this series. It is felt that living related kidney donation is justified when the relative is sincerely motivated and well informed prior to donation.

Living-related donor nephrectomy by eleventh rib intraperitoneal extrapleural incision

Living-related kidney transplants continue to yield the best results. The two primary approaches for living-related donor nephrectomy are the intraperitoneal and extraperitoneal operations. We herein describe a series of 8 cases in which an eleventh rib intraperitoneal extrapleural incision was used for living-related donor nephrectomy. The advantages of the operation in terms of improved ability to manage vascular anomalies is described. No complication has been encountered.

Living donor nephrectomy: factors influencing morbidity

Recent interest in transperitoneal live donor nephrectomy prompted us to review our experience with 104 live donor nephrectomies performed through a standard flank extraperitoneal approach. There were no deaths and 14.4 per cent of the patients had minor complications that were managed easily. Factors influencing morbidity in the voluntary donor are analyzed.

The older living renal donor: prognosis for the donor and recipient

Results after 46 renal transplants from living donors more than 50 years old are presented. There were no complications after transperitoneal nephrectomy and renal function remained stable in all donors. The mean followup for transplant recipients was 6.2 years. The 2-year patient and graft survival rates were 76.1 and 60.9 per cent, respectively, while the corresponding 5-year rates were 60.5 and 46.5 per cent, respectively. These results suggest that age per se should not eliminate living related kidney donation.