Perioperative Events and Complications in Minimally Invasive Live Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Transplantation. 2016;100:2264-2275. [PMID: 27428715 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000001327]

Impact of cardiovascular risk factors on glomerular filtration rate and on morbidity and mortality after renal donation

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Living donor kidney transplantation increases recipient and graft survival compared with cadaveric donor transplantation. Correct donor selection is essential to optimize transplant outcomes as well as post-donation safety. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of baseline characteristics of living kidney donors on renal function, morbidity and mortality after nephrectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study was designed that included living kidney donors followed up at the Salamanca University Hospital between 2011 and January 2023. Statistical significance was considered if p≤0.05.

RESULTS

Ninety-one donors were included, 63% women, with a mean age of 52±10.8 years. A percentage of 52.1 were overweight or obese, 9.9% had HT and 22% were dyslipidemic. Mortality was 0% and 84.3% had no complications. GFR (CKD-EPI) dropped from 92 to 57.1ml/min/1.73m2 at one month after nephrectomy. There was a significant increase in proteinuria at one month and 2 years. After nephrectomy, BMI, MAP, HbA1c, uric acid, total cholesterol, C-LDL and triglycerides increased (p≤0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The mean GFR of donors as well as its compensation after nephrectomy was lower and slower than the figures reported in the literature, probably due to the higher mean age of our donors. The increased prevalence of obesity, dyslipidemia and hyperuricemia postdonation and worsening of HbA1c and MAP levels make strict monitoring of donors necessary. In our experience, kidney donation is a safe process with low morbidity and mortality.

Evaluating Risk in Kidney Living Donors

Kidney donation is a safe procedure for carefully screened donors. The growing shortage of organs and improved survival rates among recipients of living donor transplants have broadened the criteria for acceptable living donors, including older individuals and those with pre-existing health conditions. Consequently, ensuring both the short- and long-term safety of living donors is of paramount importance. The primary objectives are to prevent the need for kidney replacement therapy, major cardiovascular events, or premature death. Lifelong monitoring of living donors is essential to facilitate early treatment for preventable illnesses. To this end, annual follow-up is generally recommended, which should minimally include an assessment of blood pressure, body mass index, kidney function, albuminuria, lifestyle factors, and general wellbeing. However, the management of these risk factors and treatment targets in this population remain inadequately defined. Recommendations for genetic counseling in cases of living-related donation also remain inconsistent. The aim of this mini-review is to address the challenges in evaluating the evidence on the long-term consequences of kidney donation, particularly concerning the risk of developing end-stage kidney disease, cardiovascular mortality, gestational complications, and hypertension. This article aligns with the ESOT call for action to promote living kidney donation and EKITA's mission.

Health-related quality of life in living kidney donors participating in kidney exchange programmes

Background

Kidney exchange programmes (KEPs) have revolutionized living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) by enabling transplants for patients with HLA- or ABO-incompatible donors. However, the implications for donors participating in KEPs, particularly regarding postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL), are not well elucidated. This study compares the HRQoL of donors participating in KEPs with donors donating directly (non-KEPs).

Methods

The study included 724 donors, with 121 in the KEP group and 603 in the non-KEP group. Outcomes were assessed using the mental component summary (MCS), physical component summary (PCS), EQ-5D-3L, MVI-20 score, and self-rated pain level. We used a mixed-effects regression model to assess differences between KEP and non-KEP over time, accounting for repeated measures within subjects.

Results

There was a significant temporary decline in both the MCS and PCS post-donation; however, these outcomes returned to pre-donation levels after an interval of 2 months. Donors participating in the KEP had higher PCS and MCS 1-year post-donation. Comparable results were observed in the self-assessed HRQoL using the EQ-5D-3L instrument, as well as in the fatigue scores measured by the MVI-20.

Conclusions

We found that participation in KEPs does not adversely affect donors' short- or long-term mental and physical HRQoL outcomes and that LDKT donors have HRQoL of pre-donation levels soon after donation. These insights are reassuring, indicating that donors participating in KEPs can expect HRQoL comparable to those who do not. This reinforces the viability of KEPs as a safe option for expanding LDKT and findings can inform patient and donor education.

A Novel Technique for Hand-Assisted Laparoscopy in Difficult Nephrectomies-Is One Hand Better Than Two? A Single-Centre, Single-Surgeon Series

Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is the standard of care for T1 renal tumors and nowadays being used for T2 or higher tumors, resulting in higher the conversion rates. To bridge this gap, the hand-assisted laparoscopy (HAL) method was introduced. Even now, in the robotic era, this HAL approach continues to find importance in urology, especially in the most challenging cases, albeit, with a relatively low usage rate due to the cost involved and availability of hand port devices. Here, we report a case series using a novel modification of the HAL nephrectomy (HALN) technique when open conversion is needed. From a prospective database, we retrospectively analyzed the data of Six patients who underwent HALN at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences between January 2019 and December 2022. Indications for surgery included both malignant and benign renal disease. Four surgeries were performed on the right side while two were performed on the left. Five patients underwent a HALN for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and 1 for a benign non-functioning kidney. In our series, all the cases with RCC had were T2a or higher. Our case series shows that HALN is technically safe, effective, and a great adjunct to conventional laparoscopy. The ingenious use of a surgical glove as a hand port is an easy-to-make-and- use device in such challenging surgeries.

Trends in kidney transplantation and living donor nephrectomy in Germany: a total population analysis from 2006 to 2021

PURPOSE

To analyze recent trends of surgical access routes, length of hospital stay (LOS), and mortality in kidney transplantation (KT) and living donor nephrectomy (LDN) in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied the nationwide German hospital billing database and the German hospital quality reports from 2006 to 2021.

RESULTS

There were a total of 35.898 KTs. In total, 9044 (25%) were living donor transplantations, while 26.854 (75%) were transplantations after donation after brain death (DBD). The share of open LDN decreased from 82% in 2006 to 22% in 2020 (- 4%/year; p < 0.001). The share of laparoscopic LDN increased from 18% in 2006 to 70% in 2020 (+ 3%/year; p < 0.001). The share of robotic LDN increased from 0% in 2006 to 8% in 2020 (+ 0.6%/year; p < 0.001). Robotic-assisted KT increased from 5 cases in 2016 to 13 procedures in 2019 (p = 0.2). LOS was shorter after living donor KT, i.e., 18 ± 12.1 days versus 21 ± 19.6 days for DBD renal transplantation (p < 0.001). Moreover, LOS differed for open versus laparoscopic versus robotic LDN (9 ± 3.1 vs. 8 ± 2.9 vs. 6 ± 2.6; p = 0.031). The overall in-hospital mortality was 0.16% (n = 5) after LDN, 0.47% (n = 42) after living donor KT and 1.8% (n = 475) after DBD KT.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increasing trend toward minimal-invasive LDN in recent years. Overall, in-hospital mortality was low after KT. However, 5 deceased healthy donors after LKD caution that the risks of this procedure should also be taken very seriously.

Right versus left fully robotic live donor nephrectomy and open kidney transplantation: Does the laterality of the donor kidney really matter?

Objective

Robotic-assisted live donor nephrectomy (LDN) is being gradually adopted across transplant centers. The left donor kidney is preferred over right due to anatomical factors and ease of procurement. We aimed to study donor and recipient outcomes after robotic procurement and subsequent open implantation of right and left kidneys.

Methods

All fully robotic LDNs and their corresponding open kidney transplants performed at our center between February 2016 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

Out of 196 robotic LDN (49 [right] vs. 147 [left]), 10 (5.1%) donors had intra-operative events (6.1% [right] vs. 4.8% [left], p=0.71). None of the LDN required conversion to open surgery. The operative times were comparable for the two groups. Nausea (13.3%) was the most common post-operative complication. There was no mortality in either LDN group. Herein, we report our outcomes on 156 recipients (39 right and 117 left allografts) excluding robotic implants, exports, and pediatric recipients. There were no significant differences between right and left kidney recipients with respect to 1-year post-transplant patient survival (100.0% vs. 98.1%, p=0.45) or graft survival (93.9% vs. 97.1%, p=0.11), or delayed graft function (7.7% vs. 5.1%, p=0.55).

Conclusion

Non-hand-assisted robotic live donor nephrectomies can be safely performed with excellent outcomes. Right LDN was not associated with higher incidence of complications compared to left LDN. Open implantation of robotically procured right renal allografts was not associated with higher risk of recipient complications.

Renal Transplantation: Pretransplant Workup, Surgical Techniques, and Surgical Anatomy

End-stage renal disease continues to grow worldwide, and renal transplantation remains the primary and most effective treatment to handle this burden. Living-donor transplantation is the ideal mechanism for transplant recipients to have a successful allograft but carries both medical and surgical risks. Cadaveric kidneys have their own risks and can have a high rate of success as well. Multimodality imaging is crucial and has improved greatly during the last 20 years. Finally, a robust understanding of current surgical techniques can facilitate better postoperative imaging when early complications are a consideration.

Chylous Ascites After Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Is Early Surgical Intervention Necessary?

OBJECTIVES

Chylous ascites is a rare complication that may occur after living donor nephrectomy. The continuous loss of lymphatics, which carries a high risk of morbidity, may ensue in possible immunodeficiency and protein-calorie malnutrition. Here, we presented patients who developed chylous ascites after robotassisted living donor nephrectomy and reviewed the current literature of therapeutic strategies for chylous ascites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 424 laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies performed at a single transplant center; among these, we studied the records of 3 patients who developed chylous ascites following robot-assisted living donor nephrectomy.

RESULTS

Among 438 living donor nephrectomies, 359 (81.9%) were laparoscopic and 77 (18.1%) were by robotic assistance. In the 3 cases highlighted in our study, patient 1 did not respond to conservative therapy, which consisted of diet optimization, total parenteral nutrition, and octreotide (somatostatin). Patient 1 subsequently underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopy with suture ligation and clipping of leaking lymphatic vessels, allowing the chylous ascites to subside. Patient 2 similarly did not respond to conservative treatment and developed ascites. Despite initial improvement after wound interrogation and drainage, patient 2 had continued symptoms, resulting in diagnostic laparoscopy and repair of leaky channels leading to the cisterna chyli. Patient 3 developed chylous ascites 4 weeks postoperatively and received ultrasonographic-guided paracentesis by interventional radiology, with results showing an aspirate consistent with chyle. The patient's diet was optimized, allowing for initial improvement and eventual return to normal diet.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case series and literature review demonstrate the importance of early surgical intervention after failed conservative management for resolution of chylous ascites in patients after robotassisted donor laparoscopic nephrectomy.

Investigating strategies to improve AccesS to Kidney transplantation (the ASK trial): a protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial with parallel process evaluation

BACKGROUND

The UK's living-donor kidney transplant (LDKT) activity falls behind that of many other countries internationally, with less than 20% of those eligible receiving a LDKT each year. Certain individuals with kidney disease in the UK appear to be particularly disadvantaged in accessing a LDKT; the most socioeconomically deprived people with kidney disease are 60% less likely to receive a LDKT than the least deprived. Improving equity in living-donor kidney transplantation has been highlighted as an international research priority.

METHODS

This feasibility trial was designed to determine the feasibility of delivery and acceptability of a multicomponent intervention designed to improve access to living-donor kidney transplantation. The intervention comprises three main components: (i) a meeting between a home educator and the transplant candidate for a dedicated discussion about living-donor kidney transplantation, living kidney donation and potential donors; (ii) a standardized letter from a healthcare professional to a candidate's potential donors and (iii) a home-based education and family engagement session including two home educators, the transplant candidate and their family. The primary objectives are to establish the feasibility (i) of delivering the developed intervention in existing care pathways and (ii) of undertaking a randomised controlled trial of the intervention. A mixed-methods parallel process evaluation will investigate the acceptability, implementation and mechanisms of impact of the intervention. The trial is based at two UK hospitals: a transplanting hospital and a non-transplanting referral hospital. Individuals are eligible if they are ≥ 18 years old, are active on the kidney transplant waiting list or have been referred for transplant listing and do not have a potential living-donor undergoing surgical assessment. Randomisation will be undertaken with concealed allocation. Participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to (i) the intervention or (ii) usual care, stratified by site to ensure a balance in terms of local differences. Minimisation will be used to ensure balance in sex, age group and socioeconomic strata, with probability weighting of 0.8 in order to reduce predictability. The primary outcomes are recruitment (% of those eligible and invited who consent to randomisation) and retention (% of participants completing follow-up).

DISCUSSION

Findings will inform the design of a future fully powered, randomised controlled trial to formally evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention at improving equitable access to living-donor kidney transplantation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN10989132 Applied 30/10/20.

Complications After Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy

OBJECTIVE

To study the complications of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALLDN) with an emphasis on complications occurring early after hospital discharge up to 120 days after surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively categorized complications using the Clavien-Dindo classification in 3002 HALLDNs performed at 1 center from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2019. In addition to overall summaries, modeling was used to identify correlates of complications before and after living donation.

RESULTS

Of these donors, 87% were White, 59% were female, the mean age was 45 years (range, 18-77 years), 30.3% had a body mass index of at least 30, and 36.3% had previous abdominopelvic surgery. There were no deaths related to the surgery. The incidence of major complications (intraoperative complications plus Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III postoperatively) was 2.5% (n=74). The overall complication rate was 12.4% (n=371), including 15 intraoperative, 76 postoperative before discharge, and 280 after discharge to 120 days. Reoperation was required in 1.8% of patients (n=54), and all but 1 of these were incision-related problems. Seventy-six percent of all complications occurred after discharge, including 85% of the reoperations. For major complications, no risk factor was found. Risk factors for any complication included paramedian incision (hazard ratio [HR], 2.54; 95% CI, 1.49 to 4.34; P<.001); a history of abdominopelvic surgery (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.76; P=.01), male sex (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.76; P=.01), non-White race (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.88; P=.02), and early era of the experience.

CONCLUSION

Most major complications of HALLDN occur after discharge, suggesting that close follow-up is warranted and that the current literature may underestimate the true incidence.

Donor Autonomy and Self-Sacrifice in Living Organ Donation: An Ethical Legal and Psychological Aspects of Transplantation (ELPAT) View

Clinical teams understandably wish to minimise risks to living kidney donors undergoing surgery, but are often faced with uncertainty about the extent of risk, or donors who wish to proceed despite those risks. Here we explore how these difficult decisions may be approached and consider the conflicts between autonomy and paternalism, the place of self-sacrifice and consideration of risks and benefits. Donor autonomy should be considered as in the context of the depth and strength of feeling, understanding risk and competing influences. Discussion of risks could be improved by using absolute risk, supra-regional MDMs and including the risks to the clinical team as well as the donor. The psychological effects on the donor of poor outcomes for the untransplanted recipient should also be taken into account. There is a lack of detailed data on the risks to the donor who has significant co-morbidities.

Robotic versus hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: comparison of two minimally invasive techniques in kidney transplantation

Robot-assisted donor nephrectomy (RDN) is increasingly used due to its advantages such as its precision and reduced learning curve when compared to laparoscopic techniques. Concerns remain among surgeons regarding possible longer warm ischemia time. This study aimed to compare patients undergoing robotic living donor nephrectomy to the more frequently used hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HLDN) technique, focusing on warm ischemia time, total operative time, learning curve, hospital length of stay, donor renal function and post-operative complications. Retrospective study comparing RDN to HLDN in a collaborative transplant network. 176 patients were included, 72 in RDN and 104 in HLDN. Left-sided nephrectomy was favored in RDN (82% vs 52%, p < 0.01). Operative time was longer in RDN (287 vs 160 min; p < 0.01), while warm ischemia time was similar (221 vs 213 secs, p = 0.446). The hospital stay was shorter in RDN (3.9 vs 5.7 days, p < 0.01).Concerning renal function, a slightpersistent increase of 7% of the creatinine ratio was observed in the RDN compared to the HLDN group (1.56 vs 1.44 at 1-month checkup, p < 0.01). The results show that RDN appears safe and efficient in comparison to the gold-standard HLDN technique. Warm ischemia time was similar for both techniques, whereas RDN operative time was longer. Patients undergoing RDN had a shorter hospital stay, this being possibly mitigated by differences in center release criteria. Donor renal function needs to be assessed on a longer-term basis for both techniques.

Living Kidney Donor Knowledge of Provided Information and Informed Consent: The PRINCE Study

BACKGROUND

Informed consent for living kidney donation is paramount, as donors are healthy individuals undergoing surgery for the benefit of others. The informed consent process for living kidney donors is heterogenous, and the question concerns how well they are actually informed. Knowledge assessments, before and after donor education, can form the basis for a standardized informed consent procedure for live kidney donation.

METHODS

In this prospective, a multicenter national cohort study conducted in all eight kidney transplant centers in The Netherlands, we assessed the current status of the informed consent practice for live donor nephrectomy. All of the potential living kidney donors in the participating centers were invited to participate. They completed a pop quiz during their first outpatient appointment (Cohort A). Living kidney donors completed the same pop quiz upon admission for donor nephrectomy (Cohort B).

RESULTS

In total, 656 pop quizzes were completed (417 in Cohort A, and 239 in Cohort B). The average donor knowledge score was 7.0/25.0 (±3.9, range 0-18) in Cohort A, and 10.5/25.0 (±2.8, range 0-17.5) in Cohort B. Cohort B scored significantly higher on overall knowledge, preparedness, and the individual item scores (p < 0.0001), except for the long-term complications (p = 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Donor knowledge generally improves during the live donor workup, but it is still quite disappointing. Long-term complications, especially, deserve more attention during living kidney donor education.

Expectations of a new opt-out system of consent for deceased organ donation in England: A qualitative interview study

Introduction

In 2020 England moved to an opt‐out deceased donation law. We aimed to investigate the views of a mixed stakeholder group comprising people with kidney disease, family members and healthcare practitioners towards the change in legislation. We investigated the expected impacts of the new legislation on deceased‐donor and living‐donor transplantation, and views on media campaigns regarding the law change.

Methods

We undertook in‐depth qualitative interviews with people with kidney disease (n = 13), their family members (n = 4) and healthcare practitioners (n = 15). Purposive sampling was used to ensure diversity for patients and healthcare practitioners. Family members were recruited through snowball sampling and posters. Interviews were audio‐recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Three themes with six subthemes were identified: (i) Expectations of impact (Hopeful patients; Cautious healthcare professionals), (ii) Living‐donor transplantation (Divergent views; Unchanged clinical recommendations), (iii) Media campaigns (Single message; Highlighting recipient benefits). Patients expected the law change would result in more deceased‐donor transplant opportunities.

Conclusions

Clinicians should ensure patients and families are aware of the current evidence regarding the impact of opt‐out consent: expectations of an increased likelihood of receiving a deceased‐donor transplant are not currently supported by the evidence. This may help to prevent a decline in living‐donor transplantation seen in other countries with similar legislation. Media campaigns should include a focus on the impact of organ receipt.

Patient or Public Contribution

Two patient representatives from the Kidney Disease Health Integration Team, Primrose Granville and Soumeya Bouacida, contributed to the content and design of the study documents.

Procedure: Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

Minimally invasive approaches for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are necessary to limit surgical morbidity, and technical challenges differ from those encountered during other laparoscopic renal surgeries. Presented here is a step-by-step guide for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy-focusing on pure laparoscopic and hand-assisted techniques. Both straight laparoscopic and hand-assisted nephrectomies were performed in healthy donors who met transplantation criteria in terms of global health and psychologic well-being. Patient positioning, trocar placement, surgical steps, incision closure, and postoperative care are reviewed. Standard equipment used to complete this procedure is itemized. This guide outlines indications, preoperative preparation, and procedural steps for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The techniques and the evolution thereof represent our experience since 2002 for 510 cases. The attached videos demonstrate a high-volume surgeon's typical approach while factoring in anatomical variation. In both cases, the donor nephrectomies were without incident and the patient's postoperative courses were without complication. A basic framework for donor nephrectomy is presented highlighting surgical steps we believe to be essential for graft preservation and ultimately effective transplantation. Although no two cases are the same, systematic approaches will allow for timely case completion, fewer complications, and better donor/recipient outcomes.

Effect of rectus sheath block vs. spinal anaesthesia on time-to-readiness for hospital discharge after trans-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: A randomised trial

BACKGROUND

The role of spinal anaesthesia in patients having a transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in an enhanced recovery setting has never been investigated.

OBJECTIVE

We explored whether substituting a rectus sheath block (RSB) with spinal anaesthesia, as an adjunct to a general anaesthetic technique, influenced time-to-readiness for discharge in patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

DESIGN

Prospective randomised open blinded end-point (PROBE) study with two parallel groups.

SETTING

Tertiary University Hospital.

PATIENTS

Ninety-seven patients undergoing a trans-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

INTERVENTION

Patients (n=52) were randomly assigned to receive a general anaesthetic and a surgical RSB with 2 mg kg-1 of levobupivacaine at the time of surgical closure or a spinal anaesthetic with hyperbaric bupivacaine 12.5 mg and diamorphine 0.5 mg (n=45) before general anaesthesia.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

The primary outcome was the time-to-readiness for discharge following surgery.

RESULTS

Median [IQR] times-to-readiness for discharge were 75 [56 to 83] and 79 [67 to 101] h for RSB and spinal anaesthesia and there was no significant difference in times-to-readiness for discharge (median difference 4 (95% CI, 0 to 20h; P  = 0.07)). There were no significant differences in pain scores at rest (P  = 0.91) or on movement (P = 0.66). Median 24-h oxycodone consumptions were similar (P  = 0.80). Nausea and vomiting scores were similar (P = 0.57) and urinary retention occurred in one vs. four patients with RSB and spinal anaesthesia, respectively (P  = 0.077).

CONCLUSION

Substitution of RSB with spinal anaesthesia using 12.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine and 0.5 mg diamorphine, together with a general anaesthetic failed to confer any benefit on time-to-discharge readiness following transperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. RSB provided similar analgesia in the immediate postoperative period with a low frequency of side-effects in this cohort.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT02700217.

[Robot-assisted Living Donor Nephrectomy - Technical Aspects and Initial Evidence]

Minimally invasive donor nephrectomy has become the standard procedure in most transplant centres over the past two decades and has contributed to a reduction in postoperative morbidity for the donor. Robot-assisted technology is an alternative to conventional (hand-assisted) laparoscopic technology and will find increasing use in the future. In this review article, we address technical aspects of robotic-assisted donor nephrectomy, in accordance with our own experience and will provide an overview of the currently available literature. Robot-assisted living kidney donation is a safe procedure with a very low postoperative complication rate. The procedure offers advantages over the open surgical technique with respect to the reduction in the postoperative need for analgesia and the duration of hospital stay, with longer operating times and warm ischemia times, but without a measurable effect on transplant function. The postoperative outcome parameters are comparable to those of the laparoscopic technique, indicating a further acceleration of postoperative convalescence. The advantages of robot-assisted technology, due to the better exposure options, are most relevant in patients with a high BMI and multiple renal arteries, as well as in right-sided nephrectomies in which a longer transplant artery can be obtained. Robot-assisted living kidney donation will play a major role in the future of transplant surgery and is a serious alternative to conventional laparoscopic technology.

The Evolution of Living Donor Nephrectomy Program at A Hellenic Transplant Center. Laparoscopic vs. Open Donor Nephrectomy: Single-Center Experience

Since its introduction in 1995, laparoscopic nephrectomy has emerged as the preferred surgical approach for living donor nephrectomy. Given the ubiquity of the surgical procedure and the need for favorable outcomes, as it is an elective operation on otherwise healthy individuals, it is imperative to ensure appropriate preoperative risk stratification and anticipate intraoperative challenges. The aim of the present study was to compare peri-and postoperative outcomes of living kidney donors (LD), who had undergone laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN), with a control group of those who had undergone open nephrectomy (ODN). Health-related quality of life (QoL) was also assessed using the validated SF-36 questionnaire. Data from 252 LD from a single transplant center from March 2015 to December 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. In total, 117 donors in the LDN and 135 in the ODN groups were assessed. Demographics, type of transplantation, BMI, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, peri- and postoperative complications, renal function at discharge and QoL were recorded and compared between the two groups using Stata 13.0 software. There was no difference in baseline characteristics, nor in the prevalence of peri-and postoperative complications, with a total complication rate of 16% (mostly minor, Clavien–Dindo grade II) in both groups, while a different pattern of surgical complications was noticed between them. Duration of surgery was significantly longer in the ODN group (median 240 min vs. 160 min in LDN, p < 0.01), warm ischemia time was longer in the LDN group (median 6 min vs.2 min in ODN, p < 0.01) and length of hospital stay shorter in the LDN group (median 3 days vs. 7 days in ODN). Conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery was 2.5%. There was a drop in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at discharge of 36 mL/min in the LDN and 32 mL/min in the ODN groups, respectively (p = 0.03). No death, readmission or reoperation were recorded. There was a significant difference in favor of LDN group for each one of the eight items of the questionnaire (SF1–SF8). As for the two summary scores, while the total physical component summary (PCS) score was comparable between the two groups (57.87 in the LDN group and 57.07 in the ODN group), the mental component summary (MCS) score was significantly higher (62.14 vs. 45.22, p < 0.001) in the LDN group. This study provides evidence that minimally invasive surgery can be performed safely, with very good short-term outcomes, providing several benefits for the living kidney donor, thereby contributing to expanding the living donor pool, which is essential, especially in countries with deceased-donor organ shortage.

Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy offers more liberal use of right kidneys: lessons learned from 565 cases - a retrospective single-center study

The introduction of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy caused a shift toward' left donor nephrectomy. Some centers report a significantly low rate of endoscopic right donor nephrectomy. Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP-DN) was introduced as a novel surgical technique, which aims to avoid intra-abdominal complications. It was also reported to provide technical advantages for right-sided DN. In this retrospective single-center study, we evaluated the impact of HARP-DN technique on utilization of right-sided DNs. After the implementation of HARP-DN on February 2009, a total of 565 DNs were performed until December 2015. The introduction of HARP-DN technique resulted in an immediate increase in the utilization of right kidneys from 6.1% to an average of 19.6% annually. The donors 'outcome was similar to the left-sided and right-sided DN groups, excluding the increased incidence of incisional hernias in left kidney donors. None of the donors developed intra-abdominal complications. In conclusion, the implementation of HARP technique significantly increased the use of right-sided DNs, which enables a more liberal use of donors in LDKT.

Interactive Virtual Reality Renal Models as an Educational and Preoperative Planning Tool for Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of interactive virtual reality (iVR) in providing a three-dimensional (3D) experience with the donor's anatomy for surgeons and patients, we present a retrospective, case-controlled study assessing the impact of iVR renal models prior to LDN on both surgical outcomes and patients' understanding of the procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty patients undergoing LDN were prospectively recruited; their contrast-enhanced CT scans were transformed into iVR models. An iVR platform allowed the surgeons to rotate and deconstruct the renal anatomy; patients could also view their anatomy as the procedure was explained to them. Questionnaires assessed surgeons' understanding of renal anatomy after CT alone and after CT+iVR. Surgeons also commented on whether iVR impacted their preoperative plan. Patients assessed their anatomical understanding and anxiety level before and after iVR. Surgical outcomes for the iVR cohort were compared to a retrospectively matched, non-iVR cohort of LDN patients.

RESULTS

Surgeons altered their preoperative plan in 18 of 20 LDNs after viewing iVR models. Patients reported better understanding of their anatomy (5/5) and noted decreased preoperative anxiety (5/5) after viewing iVR. When compared to the non-iVR group, the iVR group had a 25% reduction in median operative time (P < .001). In terms of surgical outcomes, patients in the iVR group had a 40% lower median relative change in postoperative creatinine (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative viewing of iVR models altered the operative approach, decreased the operative time, and improved donor patient outcomes. iVR models also reduced patients' preoperative anxiety.

Complex Surgical Reconstruction of Upper Pole Artery in Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation

Background

The use of allografts with multiple renal arteries has increased in the era of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Although several studies recommend reconstructing lower pole arteries (LPAs) to reduce risk of urologic complications, it is common opinion to ligate upper pole arteries (UPAs) with a diameter less than 2 mm because of increased risk of thrombosis related to their reconstruction. This retrospective study evaluates the feasibility and safety of reconstructing thin UPAs during living-donor kidney transplantation, with the goal of maintaining the integrity of the graft and assuring its maximal function.

Material/Methods

Data from 922 living-donor kidney transplants performed between 2009 and 2019 were reviewed. Six cases with UPAs were identified (0.65%). The study endpoints were incidence of allograft vascular and urologic complications, slow graft function, delayed graft function, graft failure, and graft and patient survival.

Results

The UPAs had a mean diameter of 1.8±0.28 mm. Methods of reconstruction included: interposition graft (n=2), end-to-side anastomosis inside the renal hilum to a branch of the main renal artery (n=3), and side-to-side anastomosis with the main renal artery (n=1). Additional reconstruction of LPAs (n=2) and main renal arteries (n=2) was performed. During a median (range) follow-up of 14.5 (9–49) months no complications were observed.

Conclusions

Ex vivo reconstruction of UPAs with a diameter less than 2 mm is worth attempting, particularly in the setting of living-donor kidney transplantation.

One size does not fit all: understanding individual living kidney donor risk

Living donor kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) but confers a risk upon the donor, both in the short term and many years after donation. While perioperative mortality is low and longevity does not appear to be adversely affected, there are small increases in the risk of other important morbidities. The overall risk of ESKD among donors is low but appears to be three- to five-fold higher than among healthy non-donors, and this relative risk is even higher among donors of African ancestry. For these individuals, apolipoprotein L1 genotyping may be helpful. Kidney donors also have an increased risk of developing hypertension post-donation and a modestly increased risk of developing gout. Living kidney donation also increases the risk of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia while not affecting other important pregnancy outcomes. As our understanding of donor risk grows, it is important to counsel prospective donors according to their individual risk and so obtain better informed donor consent. As knowledge advances, it is also important that all clinicians who manage kidney transplant candidates have an up to date understanding of donor risk to inform shared decision making.

Outcomes and surgical complications following living-donor renal transplantation using kidneys retrieved with trans-peritoneal or retro-peritoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy

The best minimally invasive procedure for living-donor kidney retrieval remains debated. Our objective was to assess trans-peritoneal (TP) and retro-peritoneal (RP) hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN). In this single-center retrospective study, we analyzed results from 317 living-donor renal transplants (RT) performed between 2008 and 2016. Donor and recipient outcomes were compared between TP-HALDN (n = 235) and RP-HALDN (n = 82). Conversion to open nephrectomy (0.4% vs 0%; P = 1.000), intra-operative complications (1.7% vs 1.2%; P = 1.000), and 1-year overall post-operative complications (11.9% vs 17.1%; P = .258) rates were similar in TP-HALDN and RP-HALDN. Overall surgical site infections were higher in RP-HALDN (6.1% vs 1.7%; P = .053), whereas incisional hernias were only recorded following TP-HALDN (3.4% vs 0%; P = .118). The duration of the procedure was 11-minute shorter for TP-HALDN than RP-HALDN (P < .001) but extraction time was equivalent (2, IQR 1.5-2.5 minutes; P = 1.000). RT following TP-HALDN and RP-HALDN showed comparable one-year death-censored allograft survival (97% vs 98.8%; P = .685), primary non-function (0.4% vs 0%; P = .290), delayed graft function (1.3% vs 4.9%; P = .077), and urological complications (2.6% vs 4.9%; P = .290) rates. In our series, donor and recipient outcomes were not substantially affected by the approach used for donor nephrectomy. TP-HALDN and RP-HALDN were both safe and effective.

Unspecified live kidney donation by urological patients

BACKGROUND

Individuals with benign kidney disorders undergoing nephrectomy have three possibilities: Autotransplantation, with a certain risk of complications, but without a clear benefit; discarding the kidney; or living kidney donation.

AIM

To investigate whether patients with benign kidney disorders and a medical indication for nephrectomy are suitable as unspecified live kidney donors.

METHODS

We searched all clinical data from 1994-2019 for unspecified donors and their transplant recipients (n = 160). Nine of these 160 donors had pre-existing kidney disorders necessitating nephrectomy and had decided to donate their kidney anonymously after discussing the possibility of kidney donation. We studied the clinical course of these nine donating patients and their transplant recipients.

RESULTS

Seven of nine donating patients indicated unbearable loin pain as the main complaint, one donating patient refused ureterocutaneostomy and one had two aneurysms of the renal artery. Postoperatively, seven donating patients described absence of pain and one a significant reduction after the nephrectomy. The average 1-year creatinine level in the donating patients was 88 µmol/L and after a median of 6.9 years the average creatinine level was 86.6 µmol/L. In the transplant recipients, one major complication occurred which led to death and in one transplant recipient graft function failed to normalize at first but has been stable for nine years now. Currently, all transplant recipients are off dialysis.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that patients undergoing nephrectomy as part of treatment in selected kidney disorders can function as live kidney donors.

Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Comparison of 250 Cases

Living kidney donation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease, however, the best surgical approach for minimally-invasive donor nephrectomy (DN) is still a matter of debate. This bi-centric study aimed to retrospectively compare perioperative outcomes and postoperative kidney function after 257 transperitoneal DNs including 52 robot-assisted (RDN) and 205 laparoscopic DNs (LDN). As primary outcomes, the intraoperative (operating time, warm ischemia time (WIT), major complications) and postoperative (length of stay, complications) results were compared. As secondary outcomes, postoperative kidney and graft function were analyzed including delayed graft function (DGF) rates, and the impact of the surgical approach was assessed. Overall, the type of minimally-invasive donor nephrectomy (RDN vs. LDN) did not affect primary outcomes, especially not operating time and WIT; and major complication and DGF rates were low in both groups. A history of smoking and preoperative kidney function, but not the surgical approach, were predictive for postoperative serum creatinine of the donor and recipient. To conclude, RDN and LDN have equivalent perioperative results in experienced centers. For this reason, not the surgical approach, but rather the graft- (preoperative kidney function) and patient-specific (history of smoking) aspects impacted postoperative kidney function.

Hyperamylasemia Post Living Donor Nephrectomy Does Not Relate to Pain

Introduction The aetiology of pain after laparoscopic donor nephrectomy remains unclear. Given the proximity of the left kidney to the tail of the pancreas, we aimed to assess whether mobilisation and retrieval of the left kidney might inflame the pancreas, leading to pain and hyperamylasaemia in the post-operative period. Patient and methods In the present study, 16 consecutive live kidney donors were analysed in the same three months period. Amylase levels were measured on days 1 and 2. For each 24-hour period post-operatively analgesia consumption was recorded, as well as pain scores at rest on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Results Three out of 16 donors presented hyperamylasemia. A multiple regression analysis found levobupivacaine dose, propofol dose, transversus abdominis plane block and day 1 amylase did not significantly predict pain scores. Interestingly, body mass index significantly correlated with increased pain scores (p = 0.041). Also, increasing CO2 insufflation pressure and use of local anaesthetic infusion catheters predicted a decreased deep pain score (p = 0.036 and p = 0.037). Conclusion There was no correlation of amylase levels and pain scores. Pancreatitis is a rare complication of nephrectomy and no overt cases were seen in the case of donor nephrectomy.

Persistent orchialgia after laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: an underestimated complication requiring information adjustment

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (LLDN) is the gold-standard procedure for kidney procurement. Ipsilateral orchialgia has barely been described. Some authors reported that ligation of gonadal vein (GV) above iliac vessel bifurcation could prevent orchialgia. We aimed to assess incidence and duration of orchialgia after LLDN in male donors despite distal ligation of GV.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LLDN from 2014 to 2017 were included. Standard procedure consisted in distal ligation of GV, close to the renal vein confluence and proximal ureteral ligation. Patients' demographics, per-operative data, and post-operative consultation reports were retrospectively reviewed. Orchialgia and scrotal symptoms were assessed through a non-validated questionnaire by phone interview.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine donors were included. Orchialgia incidence and testicular swelling were 31.9% (n = 22) and 15.9% (n = 11), respectively. Median symptom duration was 15.5 months. Orchialgia led to medical consultation in 41.7% (n = 10) of cases. All patients declared having been informed, prior to donation, about possible residual pain but not specifically orchialgia.

CONCLUSION

Orchialgia after LLDN affects more than 30% of donors, despite distal ligation of GV and led less than 50% of them to medical consultation, suggesting a large underestimation in clinical practice. Emphasis should be put on this complication during pre-donation information.

Strategies to Perform Pure Retroperitoneoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Single-Center Cohort Study

Background: Considering the increase in a number of vascular complications, right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is less preferred due to achieving not only shorter renal vein but also longer renal artery. However, recent studies have indicated that the side of the surgery would not affect the outcomes. Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and strategies to increase the safety of pure retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (RDN). Methods: We analyzed the prospectively collected medical records of 158 kidney donors who underwent RDN from January 2010 to August 2018. The patients were divided into two groups based on their side of surgery. Right- and left-sided RDNs were compared in terms of demographics, intraoperative, and postoperative data, including the development of incisional hernia (IH). The outcomes of the recipients were also evaluated. Results: Right RDN was performed in 40 (25.3%) and left RDN was performed in 118 (74.7%) donors. Operation time (P = .593), warm ischemia time (P = .271), blood loss (P = .787), and length of hospital stay (P = .908) were statistically similar in right and left RDN groups. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were statistically showed no difference between right and left RDNs. No IH was observed in any group. One-year and five-year patient survival and graft survival rates were 100% versus 97% (P = .299) and 100% versus 95% (P = .126) on both sides, respectively. Conclusion: Right RDN is an effective and safe method as on the left side. RDN has an additional advantage in the absence of IH. Experience with other retroperitoneoscopic urological interventions may have had a positive effect on the outcomes of pure RDN.

Long-term Surgical Outcome and Risk Factors in Living Kidney Donors

CONTEXT

Studies on the surgical outcome in living kidney donors mainly report perioperative complications with short follow-up.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study are to evaluate the long-term surgical outcome in living kidney donors and to identify donors with an increased risk for a complicated postoperative course.

BASIC PROCEDURES

A prospectively collected database of 496 living kidney donors at the Department of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery of the Ruprecht Karls University Heidelberg was retrospectively analyzed in a retrospective, observational single-center study.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 37 months. The perioperative severe complication (Clavien-Dindo IIIb) rate was 2.8%, the early postoperative (PO) severe complication rate (1-3 months post operation) was 0.7%, and the late PO severe complication rate (> 3 months post operation) was 8.4%. In multivariate analyses, male sex was associated with higher overall perioperative complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 1.930; P = .005) as well as higher rate of late PO complications (OR, 2.243; P = .014). An increased body mass index was associated with a higher late and severe (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb) PO complication rate (OR, 1.107; P = .009 and OR, 1.105; P = .008, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Long-term surgery-associated severe complications occur in 8.4% of kidney donors. Older age is associated with an increased operative time, greater intraoperative blood loss, and longer PO hospital stay. Male donors and donors with an increased body mass index have a higher risk for a complicated PO course after kidney donation. Within a shared decision-making process before living kidney donation, special awareness should be brought to these facts.

Robotic assisted nephrectomy for living kidney donation (RANLD) with use of multiple locking clips or ligatures for renal vascular closure

Background

Robotic assisted nephrectomy for living donation (RANLD) is a rapid emerging surgical technique competing for supremacy with totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic hand assisted techniques. Opinions about the safety of specific techniques of vascular closure in minimally invasive living kidney donation are heterogeneous and may be different for laparoscopic and robotic assisted surgical techniques.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed perioperative and short-term outcomes of our first (n=40) RANLD performed with the da Vinci Si surgical platform. Vascular closure of renal vessels was performed by either double clipping or a combination of clips and non-transfixing suture ligatures.

Results

RANLD almost quintupled in our center for the observed time period. A total of n=21 (52.5%) left and n=19 (47.5%) right kidneys were procured. Renal vessel sealing with two locking clips was performed in 18 cases (45%) Both, clips and non-transfixing ligatures were used in 22 cases (55%). Mean donor age was 53.075±11.68 years (range, 28–70). The average total operative time was 150.75±27.30 min. Right donor nephrectomy (139±22 min) was performed significantly faster than left (160.95±27.93 min, P=0.01). Warm ischemia time was similar for both vascular sealing techniques and did not differ between left and right nephrectomies. No conversion was necessary. Clavien-Dindo Grade ≤IIIb complications occurred in (n=5) 12.5%. Grade IV and V complications did not develop. In particular no hemorrhage occurred using multiple locking clips or suture ligatures for renal vascular closure. Mortality was 0%. Thirteen kidneys (32.5%) were transplanted across the AB0 barrier.

Conclusions

RANLD is an emerging minimally invasive surgical technique which facilitates excellent perioperative and short-term outcomes also when using multiple locking clips or suture ligatures for renal vascular closure.

Prophylaxis of Wound Infections-antibiotics in Renal Donation (POWAR): A UK Multicentre Double Blind Placebo Controlled Randomised Trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative infection after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) confers significant morbidity to a healthy patient group. Current UK guidelines cite a lack of evidence for routine antibiotic prophylaxis. This trial assessed if a single preoperative antibiotic dose could reduce post HALDN infections.

METHODS

Eligible donors were randomly and blindly allocated to preoperative single-dose intravenous co-amoxiclav or saline. The primary composite endpoint was clinical evidence of any postoperative infection at 30 days, including surgical site infection (SSI), urinary tract infection (UTI), and lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI).

FINDINGS

In all, 293 participants underwent HALDN (148 antibiotic arm and 145 placebo arm). Among them, 99% (291/293) completed follow-up. The total infection rate was 40.7% (59/145) in the placebo group and 23% (34 of 148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.001). Superficial SSIs were 20.7% (30/145 patients) in the placebo group versus 10.1% (15/148 patients) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.012). LRTIs were 9% (13/145) in the placebo group and 3.4% (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.046). UTIs were 4.1% (6/145) in the placebo group and 3.4% (5/148) in the antibiotic group (P = 0.72).Antibiotic prophylaxis conferred a 17.7% (95% confidence interval 7.2%-28.1%), absolute risk reduction in developing postoperative infection, with 6 donors requiring treatment to prevent 1 infection.

INTERPRETATION

Single-dose preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis dramatically reduces post-HALDN infection rates, mainly impacting SSIs and LRTIs.

Laparoscopy for living donor left nephrectomy: Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional vision

The main objective of this preliminary study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of 3-D laparoscopic living donor left nephrectomy (LDLN). The secondary objective was to compare intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between 3-D and 2-D laparoscopic LDLN. All patients who underwent a laparoscopic LDLN from January 2015 to April 2018 in a university center were included. All surgeries were performed by three experienced surgeons. Seventy three patients were included the following: 16 underwent a 3-D laparoscopic LDLN (3-D group), and 57 underwent a 2-D laparoscopic LDLN (2-D group). Operative time and warm ischemia time (WIT) were significantly lower in the 3-D group (operative time: 80.9 ± 10.2 vs 114.1 ± 32.3 minutes in the 3-D and 2-D groups, P = .0002) (WIT: 1.7 ± 0.6 vs 2.3 ± 0.9 minutes in the 3-D and 2-D groups, P = .02). No conversion to open surgery occurred in both groups. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the 3-D group. No major postoperative complications (Clavien ≥ III) occurred. One-year postoperative GFR was similar to 3-D and 2-D groups. Our preliminary study demonstrates that 3-D laparoscopic LDLN is a feasible and safe surgical procedure. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were similar in both 2-D and 3-D vision systems, but 3-D vision systems allow reduction in WIT and operative time.

[Application of totally extraperitoneal renal autotransplantation with Boari flap-pelvis anastomosis in upper urinary tract urothelial carcinomas treatment]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of the totally extraperitoneal renal autotransplantation with boari flap-pelvis anastomosis in the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), and to review the experience of renal autotransplantation for UTUC treatment.

METHODS

One case of applying the totally extraperitoneal renal autotransplantation with boari flap-pelvis anastomosis to the UTUC treatment was reported, and related literature was reviewed. The patient was a sixty-four-year old man who received right radical nephroureterectomy for right ureteral carcinoma 1 year before and diagnosed as left ureteral carcinoma(G2, high grade) this time. In order to preserve his renal function and avoid the shortness of common kidney-sparing surgery, a totally extraperitoneal procedure, including retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy, ureterectomy, renal autotransplantation and Boari flap-pelvis anastomosis, was performed to the patient.

RESULTS

The operation was completed successfully without perioperative complications. The renal function recovered to preoperative level within 1 week. No deterioration of renal function during the follow-up and no tumor recurrence was observed under cystoscopy at the 3-month postoperative consult.

CONCLUSION

The totally extraperitoneal renal autotransplantation with Boari flap-pelvis anastomosis is a feasible and effective treatment for UTUC. The innovative procedure has several advantages compared to the former ones. The extraperitoneal procedure results in significantly less pain, shorter hospital stay, decreased overall time to recovery and lower bowel complications risk without warm ischemia time extension. Meanwhile, the Boari flap-pelvis anastomosis simplifies the follow -up protocols and creates an easy route for cystoscopy and topical therapy. From the systematic clinical analysis, as well as the related literature review, it's been concluded that the renal autotransplantation can be a reasonable option for the patients who have UTUC in solitary kidney or have bilateral UTUC. This type of treatment possesses advantages of preservation of renal function and total resection of malignant lesions. But long-term data and large cohort study on renal function or tumor recurrence are still absent which will be necessary to confirm the advantages of this approach.

The true risk of living kidney donation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The safety of living donor nephrectomy is essential to the continued success, growth, and sustainability of the clinical practice of living donor kidney transplantation. This review summarizes recent advances in our understanding of the perioperative and long-term risks faced by living kidney donors.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although adverse perioperative complications are extremely rare, donors particularly men, Black, or obese, frequently experience minor complications that result in delayed return to normal duties at home and work. Similarly, although long-term complications such as end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are rare, recent studies suggest a relative increase in risk of ESRD that is attributable to donation. Several risk calculators have been developed to help donors and their care providers quantify the baseline and postdonation risk of ESRD based on demographic and health characteristics. Thresholds of risk may help define what is an acceptable level of risk to the donor and the transplant center.

SUMMARY

Individualized risk calculators now allow care providers and potential donors to objectively and transparently participate in shared decision-making about the safety of living kidney donation.

Donor and Recipient Outcomes following Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review

AIMS

We aimed to summarize available lines of evidence about intraoperative and postoperative donor outcomes following robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN) as well as outcomes of graft and recipients.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed/Medline, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases was performed in May 2018. The following search terms were combined: nephrectomy, robotic, and living donor. We included full papers that met the following criteria: original research; English language; human studies; enrolling patients undergoing RALDN.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies involving 910 patients were included in the final analysis. Mean overall operative and warm ischemia times ranged from 139 to 306 minutes and from 1.5 to 5.8 minutes, respectively. Mean estimated blood loss varied from 30 to 146 mL and the incidence of intraoperative complications ranged from 0% to 6.7%. Conversion rate varied from 0% to 5%. The mean hospital length of stay varied from 1 to 5.8 days and incidence of early postoperative complications varied from 0% to 15.7%. No donor mortality was observed. The incidence of delayed graft function was reported in 7 cases. The one- and 10-year graft loss rates were 1% and 22%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on preliminary data, RALDN appears as a safe and effective procedure.

Pure versus hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a retrospective cohort study of 1508 transplants from two centers

BACKGROUND

Although minimally invasive procedures have been established as the standard for a donor nephrectomy, there are many different surgical techniques described in the literature. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of kidney transplant procedures using the pure retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (PRDN) and hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARDN) techniques.

METHODS

A retrospective study involving 1508 transplant procedures was conducted; 874 were PRDN procedures; and 634 were HARDN. We reviewed the outcomes of the PRDN and HARDN groups, which were performed at two different centers over an identical time period.

RESULTS

Donors in the PRDN group had a longer operation time (P < 0.0001), reduced estimated blood loss (P < 0.0001), less open conversion (P = 0.0002), lower postoperative serum C-reactive protein levels (P < 0.0001), and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.0001) than the HARDN group. Recipients in the PRDN group had lower serum creatinine levels at postoperative day 1-6 and the decreased incidence of slow graft function (P = 0.0017) than the HARDN group. The HARDN procedure was an independent risk factor for the incidence of acute rejection (P = 0.0211) and graft loss (P = 0.0193).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that the PRDN procedure is less invasive for donors as it results in reduced blood loss, lower postoperative serum CRP levels, and a shorter postoperative stay than the HARDN procedure. Additionally, PRDN provides a better outcome for recipients as it lowers the incidence of acute rejection and improves graft survival compared to HARDN.

Does Low Birthweight Have an Impact on Living Kidney Donor Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION

Because nearly 30,000 people worldwide become living kidney donors each year, donor safety is of the utmost importance. Recent studies have shown that living kidney donation is associated with an increased relative risk for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). It is essential to determine which donors will be more likely to develop ESRD. One of the risk factors for ESRD in living kidney donors is hypertension and, because there are studies demonstrating that low birthweight is a risk factor for developing hypertension in adult life, we hypothesized that donors with low birthweight may be at higher risk of developing renal disease after donation.

METHODS

Seventy-three living kidney donors were examined. Donors were divided into 2 cohorts: a group with low birthweight and group with normal birthweight. We checked whether the donor birthweight has an impact on the outcome of donor renal function and on the development of hypertension.

RESULTS

Hypertension was observed statistically more frequent in the group with low birthweight (P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Glomerular filtration rate before kidney donation was found to be lower in the low-birthweight group.

Effectiveness of Heated Sterile Water vs ResoClear® for Prevention of Laparoscopic Lens Fogging in a Randomized Comparative Trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery may be complicated by visual disturbances, including lens fogging. Several techniques have been developed to prevent laparoscopic lens fogging (LLF). We aim to compare the effectiveness of two commonly available techniques in prevention of LLF: heated sterile water in a thermos flask and ResoClear^® impregnation wipes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-center prospective randomized study, 50 patients underwent an elective laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and were allocated to either heated sterile water or ResoClear^® impregnation wipes as the antifogging method. The primary outcome was the number of fogging events during the first 30 minutes of the operation, whereas secondary outcomes were operating time, number of cleaning events because of other causes, cost differences, and assessment of predicting factors for fogging events.

RESULTS

In 50 patients, the outcomes were analyzed. The number of fogging events was significantly lower when using heated sterile water (median = 0, interquartile range [IQR]: 0-0) compared to ResoClear^® (median 1.0, IQR: 0.5-3.0), p < 0.001. There were no significant differences in operating time, number of cleaning events because of other causes, and costs. No predictors of fogging events were found.

CONCLUSION

The use of heated sterile water leads to significantly less fogging events than the use of ResoClear^® impregnation wipes, resulting in an improved continuity of the surgery without differences in operating time and costs.

Nephrectomy Complication Is a Risk Factor of Clinically Meaningful Decrease in Health Utility among Living Kidney Donors

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinically relevant change in health state utility (HSU) in living kidney donors and whether this change value is constant across measures and clinical conditions and is useful for health economics studies. We aimed to 1) measure the change in the HSU score for living kidney donors from before donation to 3 months after donation and 2) estimate the minimal important decrease (MIDe) in the HSU score for living kidney donors and its associated clinical factors.

METHODS

Data from a prospective multicenter observational study measuring quality of life of kidney donors by the three-level EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) and the six-dimensional health state short form (SF-6D) before donation and at 3 months after donation provided HSU scores. Two methods were used to derive the MIDe: the anchor-based method and the distribution-based (standard error of measurement) method. Logistic regression was used to identify clinical factors associated with the MIDe after donation.

RESULTS

In total, 228 and 216 donors completed the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D, respectively. Mean HSU scores were 0.932 and 0.823 before donation and 0.895 and 0.764 at 3 months after donation. HSU scores were significantly decreased at 3 months, and 18.5% of donors rated their global health as "somewhat worse." By the EQ-5D-3L and the SF-6D, the MIDe was estimated at -0.113 and -0.116 with the anchor-based method and -0.075 and -0.077 with the distribution-based method. Risk of decreased HSU score was significantly associated with clinical complications but only marginally with surgical technique.

CONCLUSIONS

A short-term clinically relevant decrease in HSU was significantly associated with clinical complications in kidney donors. Preventing perioperative complications is of prime importance in kidney donation.