The safety of hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: The Ohio State University experience with 1500 cases

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.

Incisional Hernia Development after Live Donor Nephrectomy: Impact of Surgical Technique

BACKGROUND

Characteristics of incisional hernia (IH) formation after live donor nephrectomy (LDN) are not well-defined. The goal of this study was to describe the incidence of IH within 3 years after LDN and identify risk factors contributing to their formation.

METHODS

We performed a single-center, retrospective review of all LDN between February 2013 and October 2018. Patients with and without IH were compared based on donor and operative variables. Data were analyzed using chi-square tests with column proportions. Multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination was used to evaluate the likelihood of IH on the basis of potential risk factors.

RESULTS

Three hundred one individuals underwent live donor nephrectomy. Twenty-eight patients (9.3%) developed an IH, with a median time to development of 7 months (range: 2-24 months). Obesity (body mass index ≥30), periumbilical hand port, and vertical infraumbilical hand port were associated with increased risk of IH development on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, obesity and periumbilical hand port location were persistent risk factors for IH.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of IH after LDN is prevalent and associated with obesity and operative technique. Placing the hand port infraumbilical with a transverse fascial incision may reduce the risk of IH after LDN.

Hand port-site infection after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy for living-donor kidney transplantation: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) is widely performed to minimize burden on living kidney donors. However, hand port-site infections after HALDN may occur. This study aimed to assess the impact of donor characteristics including preoperative comorbidities and operative factors on hand port-site infection after HALDN.

Methods

In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, 1,260 consecutive HALDNs for living-donor kidney transplantation performed between January 2008 and December 2021 were evaluated. All living donors met the living kidney donor guidelines in Japan. Hand port-site infections were identified in 88 HALDN cases (7.0%). To investigate risk factors for hand port-site infection, donor characteristics including preoperative comorbidities such as hypertension, glucose intolerance, dyslipidemia, obesity, and operative factors such as operative duration, blood loss, preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, and prophylactic subcutaneous suction drain placement at the hand port-site were analyzed using logistic regression analysis.

Results

In the multivariate analysis, significant differences were identified regarding sex (P = 0.021; odds ratio [OR], 1.971; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.108-3.507), preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (P < 0.001; OR, 0.037; 95% CI [0.011-0.127]), and prophylactic subcutaneous suction drain placement at the hand port-site (P = 0.041; OR, 2.005; 95% CI [1.029-3.907]). However, a significant difference was not identified regarding glucose intolerance (P = 0.572; OR, 1.148; 95% CI [0.711-1.856]). Preoperative comorbidities may not cause hand port-site infections within the donors who meet the living kidney donor guidelines. Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis is crucial in preventing hand port-site infection, whereas prophylactic subcutaneous suction drain placement may increase the risk of hand port-site infection.

Utilizing the same incision for staged renal transplant in patients with polycystic kidney disease requiring hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy

BACKGROUNDS

Many autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) patients undergo nephrectomy and subsequent renal transplantation. We report our outcomes after hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALN) where a Rutherford-Morrison incision is used as a hand-port site and kidney extraction site, as well the future incision site for staged transplantation.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on all adult nephrectomies for ADPKD by the Transplant Surgery department at Westmead Hospital between June 2011 and June 2021. Outcomes were compared between HALN, laparoscopic nephrectomy (LN) and open nephrectomy (ON) including operation time, hospital length of stay (LOS), post-operative complications, subsequent transplantation and post-transplantation wound complications.

RESULTS

Twenty-two HALN, 8 LN and 5 ON were performed during the study period. Median kidney weights for HALN, LN and ON were significantly different (1575, 403, 3420 g respectively, P = 0.001). There was a significant difference in LOS between the HALN and ON (5.8 versus 9.8 days, P = 0.04), but not between HALN and LN (5.8 versus 5.1, P = 0.06). There was no significant difference for operation time (P = 0.34) and major complication rates (P = 0.58). There were 8 HALN, 5 LN and 2 ON who have had subsequent renal transplantation with one wound complication, an incisional hernia in the HALN group.

CONCLUSION

Our HALN is associated with a shorter LOS and similar complication rate to ON and can be efficiently performed for significantly larger kidneys than LN without a significant difference in operation time or LOS. The same Rutherford-Morrison incision site can be used for transplantation.

[Living donor nephrectomy: The French guidelines from CTAFU]

OBJECTIVE

To propose surgical recommendations for living donor nephrectomy.

METHOD

Following a systematic approach, a review of the literature (Medline) was conducted by the CTAFU regarding functional and anatomical assessment of kidney donors, including which side the kidney should be harvested from. Distinct surgical techniques and approaches were evaluated. References were considered with a predefined process to propose recommendations with the corresponding levels of evidence.

RESULTS

The recommendations clarify the legal and regulatory framework for kidney donation in France. A rigorous assessment of the donor is one of the essential prerequisites for donor safety. The impact of nephrectomy on kidney function needs to be anticipated. In case of modal vascularization of both kidneys without a relative difference in function or urologic abnormality, removal of the left kidney is the preferred choice to favor a longer vein. Mini-invasive approaches for nephrectomy provide faster donor recovery, less donor pain and shorter hospital stay than open surgery.

CONCLUSION

These French recommendations must contribute to improving surgical management of candidates for kidney donation.

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.

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.

Robotic Assisted Living Donor Nephrectomies: A Safe Alternative to Laparoscopic Technique for Kidney Transplant Donation

OBJECTIVE

To review outcomes after laparoscopic, robotic-assisted living donor nephrectomy (RLDN) in the first, and largest series reported to date.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Introduction of minimal invasive, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has increased live kidney donation, paving the way for further innovation to expand the donor pool with RLDN.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of 1084 consecutive RLDNs performed between 2000 and 2017. Patient demographics, surgical data, and complications were collected.

RESULTS

Six patients underwent conversion to open procedures between 2002 and 2005, whereas the remainder were successfully completed robotically. Median donor age was 35.7 (17.4) years, with a median BMI of 28.6 (7.7) kg/m. Nephrectomies were preferentially performed on the left side (95.2%). Multiple renal arteries were present in 24.1%. Median operative time was 159 (54) minutes, warm ischemia time 180 (90) seconds, estimated blood loss 50 (32) mL, and length of stay 3 (1) days. The median follow-up was 15 (28) months. Complications were reported in 216 patients (19.9%), of which 176 patients (81.5%) were minor (Clavien-Dindo class I and II). Duration of surgery, warm ischemia time, operative blood loss, conversion, and complication rates were not associated with increase in body mass index.

CONCLUSION

RLDN is a safe technique and offers a reasonable alternative to conventional laparoscopic surgery, in particular in donors with higher body mass index and multiple arteries. It offers transplant surgeons a platform to develop skills in robotic-assisted surgery needed in the more advanced setting of minimal invasive recipient operations.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy Techniques and Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience with More than 1000 Cases

Background

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has evolved and has been established as a surgical standard of care for kidney transplantation.

Material/Methods

This study retrospectively reviews 1132 patients who underwent 4 different laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomies: hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALDN), pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (PLDN), laparoendoscopic single-site plus 1-port donor nephrectomy (LESSOP-DN), and mini laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (MLDN).

Results

The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) for the HALDN group was meaningfully higher than those of LESSOP-DN and MLDN (57.5±52.2 mL versus 21.0±30.0 mL versus 18.2±28.7 mL) (P<0.001). The EBL for PLDN (53.3±35.3 mL) was also significantly higher than those of LESSOP-DN and MLDN (P<0.001). Length of stay (LOS) for HALDN was longer than that for LESSOP-DN (4.2±1.2 day versus 4.0±1.4 days, P=0.002). There was 1 intraoperative open conversion in the HALDN group and 2 HALDN surgeries that required postoperative exploratory laparotomy. LESSOP-DN had 3 (0.8%) postoperative incisional hernias. For recipients, the results revealed no significant differences between all 4 groups in terms of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and the 1-year graft failure rate.

Conclusions

The LESSOP-DN group was associated with a shorter incision length than those of HALDN and PLDN and shorter LOS than that of HALDN. Recipient results showed no meaningful difference regarding laparoscopic donor nephrectomy technique.

Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Nephrectomy: Evaluation of the Learning Curve

BACKGROUND

Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) has rapidly become the best alternative to open nephrectomy for living kidney donation. As more centers continue to adopt the laparoscopic technique, the safety of the initial transplants must be ensured while ascending the learning curve (LC). This study looks to determine the safety of HALDN and to describe the results of the LC in our center.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 500 HALDNs performed in our center from July 2003 to July 2017. We analyzed demographic and perioperative characteristics and complications during the first postoperative month. We divided HALDNs into 2 groups: before and after completing the LC (50 nephrectomies). For each group, we assessed operating room time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, and complication and conversion rates.

RESULTS

A total of 500 HALDNs were performed in the study period. Of those, 454 were analyzed in the 2 groups. The median operating room time was 2 hours, length of stay was 2 days, and blood loss was 50 cc. The overall rate of complication was 6.8%. There were significant differences between the 2 groups in operating time, blood loss, and length of stay (P < .05). No differences were found in terms of complication (P = .42) and conversion (P = .28) rates.

CONCLUSION

There was a significant decrease in operating time, blood loss, and length of stay in patients who underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy by an experienced laparoscopist. However, no differences were found in complication and conversion rates, which suggests that improvement in surgical training can be accomplished without altering the donor safety.

Morbidity Following Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

Background: The incidence of morbidity and readmission rate after hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) is not clear. Aims: Our study aims to review our experience with HALDN, mainly the reasons for patient readmissions. Methods: Prospectively collected data on all patients undergoing HALDNs between August 2007 and June 2015 were retrieved. The primary outcome was 30-day readmission rate. Secondary outcomes were complications and readmission etiology. Results: There were 161 nephrectomies with a median age of 51 years, 72 (44.7%) men, and 114 (70.8%) left-sided operations. Twenty-one (13%) individuals were readmitted within 30 days. There were total 25 (15.5%) readmissions during the study period. The characteristics of patients readmitted and patients not readmitted were broadly similar. Nine of 21 (43%) individuals readmitted had nonspecific findings (nonspecific findings on imaging, negative blood cultures, and raised inflammatory markers). The reasons for readmission were unrelated to nephrectomy in 24% and 19% required surgery for complications unrelated to nephrectomy. Conclusion: We observed a high readmission rate after HALDN. A significant proportion of readmissions were due to nonspecific abdominal pain associated with raised inflammatory markers and no obvious source of sepsis. Living donors should be fully informed about the risks including the possibility of complications unrelated to HALDN.

Introducing Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy after Experience in Hand-Assisted Retroperitoneoscopic Approach

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN) can help to improve donor safety by enabling enhanced precision, flexibility, control, and vision. We are presenting our initial series during the introduction of RALDN by comparing our adopted surgical technique, hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARPDN), performed at the same time interval.

METHODS

We performed 12 RALDN and 27 HARPDN with Pfannenstiel incision between March 2018 and July 2018. We evaluated the demographics, operation duration, warm/cold ischemia time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and donor and recipient serum creatinine levels retrospectively.

RESULTS

Demographics including sex, mean of age, and body mass index of the 2 groups were similar. Five cases were right sided nephrectomy in the HARPDN group. We performed only left sided donor nephrectomy in the RALDN group. The duration of operation and warm ischemia time was significantly longer in the robot-assisted group (P < .001). Postoperative major complications were not detected in any of the donors. The function of the transplanted kidneys in both groups was good on the fifth day and 1 month postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

We introduced the robot-assisted approach for donor candidates who are not suitable candidates for HARPDN in our center. The operation time and warm ischemia time was longer in the RALDN group, but it did not have any impact on outcome. The robot-assisted donor nephrectomy technique can be introduced safely in centers experienced in the hand-assisted approach.

Experience and Security of the Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Nephrectomy of a Living Donor in a Public Health Center

BACKGROUND

Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy (HALDN) is currently the procedure of choice for obtaining living donor kidneys for transplantation. In our institution, it has been the standard procedure for 5 years. Previous studies have shown the same function of the graft as that obtained by open surgery, with a lower rate of bleeding and no differences in complications. We sought to demonstrate the experience and safety of HALDN compared with open donor nephrectomy in healthy donors for kidney transplantation.

METHODS

A retrospective analytical observational study was conducted, reviewing the records of the living donors for kidney transplant undergoing open donor nephrectomy or HALDN in our center from March 1, 2009, to March 1, 2016. Renal function was assessed by the estimated glomerular filtration rate by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease method before and after donation, as well as bleeding (mL), and complications (according to Clavien), performing a comparative analysis between the two techniques using parametric or nonparametric tests.

RESULTS

A total of 179 living donor nephrectomies were performed during the study period-31 open donor nephrectomy (17.3%) and 148 HALDN (82.7%)-without relevant baseline differences, except for creatinine. HALDN has a shorter surgical time (156,473 ± 87.75 minutes vs 165,484 ± 69.95 minutes) and less bleeding (244.59 ± 416.08 mL vs 324.19 ± 197.986 mL) and a shorter duration of hospital stay (3.74 ± 1.336 days vs 4.75 ± 1.226 days). There were no significant differences in surgical complications at 30 days, or graft loss reported; there were 3 conversions (1.7%) from the HALDN to the open technique. There were no differences in renal function in the donors or recipients at the 5th day or the month after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic nephrectomy has replaced open surgery as the gold standard for living kidney donors. HALDN is a safe and feasible procedure when compared with open donor nephrectomy, achieving a shorter surgical time with less bleeding, and no difference in the number of complications. This procedure lowers costs by decreasing the duration of the hospital stay, making is feasible to perform it at any institution with appropriately trained personnel.

Hand-Assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy PERiumbilical versus Pfannenstiel incision and return to normal physical ACTivity (HAPERPACT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HALDN) using a periumbilical or Pfannenstiel incision was developed to improve donor outcome after a kidney transplant. The aim of this study was to investigate two methods of hand assistance and kidney removal during HALDN and their effect on the time it takes for the donor to return to normal physical activity.

Methods/design

This study was initiated in November 2017 and is expected to last for 2 years. To be eligible for the study, donors must be more than 20 years of age and must not be receiving permanent pain therapy. Only donors with a single artery and vein in the graft are being enrolled in this trial. Donors with infections or scars in the periumbilical or hypogastric area, bleeding disorders, chronic use of immunosuppressive agents, or active infection will be excluded. Donors will be randomly allocated to either a control arm (periumbilical incision) or an intervention arm (Pfannenstiel incision). The sample size was calculated as 26 organ donors in each group. The primary endpoint is the number of days it takes the donor to return to normal physical activity (up to 4 weeks after the operation). Secondary endpoints are intraoperative outcomes, including estimated blood loss, warm ischemia time, and duration of the operation. Postoperative pain will be assessed using the visual analog scale, rescue analgesic use, and peak expiratory flow rate. Length of hospital stay, physical activity score, time to return to work, donor satisfaction, cosmetic score, postoperative complications, and all-cause mortality in living donors will also be reported. Delayed graft function, primary non-function, serum creatinine levels, and glomerular filtration rate will also be assessed in the recipients after transplantation.

Discussion

This is the first randomized controlled trial to compare the time it takes the living donor to return to normal physical activity after HALDN using two different types of incision. The comprehensive findings of this study will help decide which nephrectomy procedure is best for living donors with regard to patient comfort and satisfaction as well as graft function in the recipient after transplantation.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03317184. Registered on 23 October 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2775-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Transition from laparoscopic to retroperitoneoscopic approach for live donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has become the standard of care due to multiple benefits. Currently, there are various techniques employed with two different approaches: transperitoneal (TLDN) or retroperitoneoscopic (RLDN) approach. There is a lack of data to determine which technique is superior, although the RLDN offers an anatomical advantage by avoidance of manipulation of the intraperitoneal organs. The aims of this study were to explore the merits of RLDN to TLDN and assess the learning curve of transition from TLDN to RLDN.

METHODS

From January 2010 to February 2017, 106 live donor nephrectomies were performed: 56 by TLDN and 50 by RLDN. Data on patient demographics, perioperative parameters, analgesic consumption, pain scores, and kidney graft function were collected and analysed. Data were compared with a Student's t test or Mann-Whitney test. A CUSUM analysis was performed to investigate the learning curve.

RESULTS

All live donor nephrectomies were successful with no conversion to open surgery. There was no blood transfusion, readmission, or mortality. No postoperative complications were graded over Clavien II. Kidney function was comparable in both groups. The follow-up period ranged from 3 to 78 months.

CONCLUSION

Retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy is a safe approach with comparable results to TLDN. RLDN has an anatomical advantage as it avoids manipulating the intraperitoneal organs and retains a virgin abdomen and hence translates to a lower perioperative complication risk.

A Proposed Classification System and Therapeutic Strategy for Chyle Leak After Laparoscopic Living-Donor Nephrectomy: A Single-Center Experience and Review of the Literature

OBJECTIVES

Chyle leak or chylous ascites remains a rare complication after laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy. Its cause and management have not been well elucidated in the literature. Thus, the aim of this study was to review the incidence of chyle leak/chylous ascites after laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy in our institute and in the literature to propose a classification system with its associated treatment strategy.

MATERILAS AND METHODS

In this retrospective review of laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy patients from January 2005 to April 2016, we identified patients with chyle leak/chylous ascites along with the care performed. A proposed classification system based on our experience and literature is described.

RESULTS

Chylous leak developed in 4 donors (2.25%). Of the 4 donors, 3 were treated nonoperatively with diet modification and subcutaneous octreotide injection. One patient required surgical intervention after not responding to second-line therapy with total parenteral nutrition.

CONCLUSIONS

Chyle leak/chylous ascites after laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy is rare, but a delayed diagnosis may lead to morbidity secondary to malnutrition and immunosuppression. Meticulous surgical dissection is essential to seal the lymphatic tubes during laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy. The proposed classification system provides a practical and tailored guide to management based on the drainage volume of chyle leak and a guide to the earlier identification of refractory cases.

Surgical complications of laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy: a retrospective study

The single-port approach has been associated with an unacceptably high rate of umbilical port hernias in large series of patients undergoing single-port cholecystectomy and colectomy and with additional surgical risks thought secondary to technical and ergonomic limitations. A retrospective review of 378 consecutive laparoendoscopic single-site(LESS) donor nephrectomies performed between 04/15/2009 and 04/09/2014 was conducted. Twelve patients (3%) developed an umbilical hernia. Eleven (92%) were female and eight (73%) of these patients had a prior pregnancy. Hernias were reported 13.5 ± 6.9 months after donation, and the mean size was 5.1 ± 3.7 cm. Seven additional cases (1.9%) required a return to the operating room for internal hernia (2), evisceration (1), bleeding (1), enterotomy (1), and wound infection (2). The original incision was utilized for reexploration. One patient required emergent conversion to an open procedure for bleeding during the initial donation. There were no mortalities. Recipient patient and graft survival were 99% and 99% at 1 year, respectively. Although reports associated with earlier experiences with single-site procedures suggested an unacceptably high rate of hernias at the surgical site, this does not seem to be the case at our center. This technique is a reliable surgical technique for left donor nephrectomy at this institution.

Perioperative Events and Complications in Minimally Invasive Live Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy has become a fully implemented and accepted procedure. Donors have to be well educated about all risks and details during the informed consent process. For this to be successful, more information regarding short-term outcome is necessary.

METHODS

A literature search was performed; all studies discussing short-term complications after minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy were included. Outcomes evaluated were intraoperative and postoperative complications, conversions, operative and warm ischemia times, blood loss, length of hospital stay, pain score, convalescence, quality of life, and costs.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety articles were included in the systematic review, 41 in the meta-analysis. Conversion rate was 1.1%. Intraoperative complication rate was 2.3%, mainly bleeding (1.5%). Postoperative complications occurred in 7.3% of donors, including infectious complications (2.6%), of which mainly wound infection (1.6%) and bleeding (1.0%). Reported mortality rate was 0.01%. All minimally invasive techniques were comparable with regard to complication or conversion rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The used techniques for minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy are safe and associated with low complication rates and minimal risk of mortality. These data may be helpful to develop a standardized, donor-tailored informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy.

Incidence and outcomes of ventral hernia repair after robotic retropubic prostatectomy: A retrospective cohort of 570 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Robotic retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) has become one of the most commonly performed robotic procedures in the United States. Ventral hernia (VH) has been increasingly recognized as an important complication after laparoscopic procedures, in general. However, data related to VH after robotic procedures is relatively scarce, especially after RRP. With increasing popularity of RRP, the purpose of this study was to look at the incidence of VH and outcomes of ventral hernia repair (VHR) after RRP.

METHODS

All patients who underwent RRP at a single institution between January 2012 and June 2014 were studied retrospectively using electronic medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 570 patients underwent RRP, of which 33 (5.8%) developed VH during the study period. Fourteen (42%) patients were obese and five (15%) had diabetes. One patient (3%) had a surgical site infection after RRP and two (6%) patients were on immunomodulators/steroids. Median duration to develop VH after RRP was 12 (1-25) months. Out of the 33 patients with VH, ten (33%) underwent VHR; five laparoscopic and five open. Median size of hernia defect and mesh used was 25 (1-144) cm² and 181 (15-285) cm², respectively. Median length of hospital stay and follow up was 0 (0-4) days and 12 (1-14) months, respectively. One patient who had initial VHR done at an outside institution had a recurrence. Thirty-two (97%) patients were alive at their last follow up. One patient died secondary to progression of prostate cancer. There was no significant 30 day morbidity (surgical site infection, fascial dehiscence, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, myocardial infarction). Of patients who decided non-operative management of VH (n = 23, 67%), none developed a complication requiring emergent surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of VH after RRP is likely underreported in prior studies. Repair, either laparoscopic or open, is safe and effective in experienced hands. Patients who decide on watchful waiting can be followed with minimal risk of incarceration/strangulation. Further studies are needed to analyze the extraction techniques after RRP and correlate with incidence of VH.

Prediction, prevention, and management of delayed graft function: where are we now?

Delayed graft function (DGF) remains a major barrier to improved outcomes after kidney transplantation. High-risk transplant recipients can be identified, but no definitive prediction model exists. Novel biomarkers to predict DGF in the first hours post-transplant, such as neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), are under investigation. Donor management to minimize the profound physiological consequences of brain death is highly complex. A hormonal resuscitation package to manage the catecholamine "storm" that follows brain death is recommended. Donor pretreatment with dopamine prior to procurement lowers the rate of DGF. Hypothermic machine perfusion may offer a significant reduction in the rate of DGF vs simple cold storage, but costs need to be evaluated. Surgically, reducing warm ischemia time may be advantageous. Research into recipient preconditioning options has so far not generated clinically helpful interventions. Diagnostic criteria for DGF vary, but requirement for dialysis and/or persistent high serum creatinine is likely to remain key to diagnosis until current work on early biomarkers has progressed further. Management centers on close monitoring of graft (non)function and physiological parameters. With so many unanswered questions, substantial reductions in the toll of DGF in the near future seem unlikely but concentrated research on many levels offers long-term promise.