Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and mini-incision open live donor nephrectomy

Incisional hernia incidence following laparoscopic versus open abdominal surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Incisional hernias (IH) are a frequent complication following open surgery (OP). While laparoscopic (LAP) surgery is designed to enhance patient recovery through smaller incisions, contemporary quantitative evidence supporting its efficacy in reducing IH rates (IHR) is sparse. This study aims to provide an overview of IHR following OP and LAP abdominal operations.

METHODS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studies in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase from inception until May 2024 comparing OP approach to LAP and reported IH incidence as a postoperative complication. Exclusion criteria included studies involving patients aged ≤ 18 years, those lacking a control group, or those with a follow-up period of less than 12 months. Studies were stratified by procedure type and by fully laparoscopic (T-LAP) versus laparoscopic-assisted (LAP-A) approaches. Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio software. To address potential clinical and methodological heterogeneity across studies, we applied the restricted maximum-likelihood estimator and random-effects models for outcome analysis.

RESULTS

8.754 studies were screened, and 72 studies were reviewed. From the initial screening, 28 studies involving 6,113 patients were included, of which 3,337 (54.6%) underwent LAP. Analysis revealed a significantly lower incidence of IH among patients who received LAP (RR 0.51; 95% CI 0.33-0.79). Subgroup analysis by surgery type indicated that bariatric (RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.068-0.578) and fundoplication procedures (RR 0.1; 95%CI 0.018-0.545) were associated with a substantial reduction in IHR. Moreover, totally-laparoscopic (T-LAP) procedures showed a significant reduction in IHR (RR 0.26;95%CI 0.14-0.5), while LAP-A procedures failed to show the same benefit.

CONCLUSION

LAP surgery is associated with reduced IHR in abdominal operations, with the benefit being particularly notable amongst LAP-A, bariatric, and fundoplication procedures. These findings underscore the advantages of LAP in specific surgical contexts, emphasizing its potential to minimize postoperative complications such as IH. Further research focusing on comparing IHR on open versus LAP approaches is warranted.

STUDY REGISTRATION

A review protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42024551280).

Living Kidney Donation: A Narrative Review of Mid- and Long-term Psychosocial Outcomes

Living kidney donors make a significant contribution to alleviating the organ shortage. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of mid- and long-term (≥12 mo) living donor psychosocial outcomes and highlight areas that have been understudied and should be immediately addressed in both research and clinical practice. We conducted a narrative review by searching 3 databases. A total of 206 articles were included. Living donors can be divided into those who donate to an emotionally or genetically related person, the so-called directed donors, or to an emotionally or genetically unrelated recipient, the so-called nondirected donors. The most commonly investigated (bio)psychosocial outcome after living donation was health-related quality of life. Other generic (bio)psychological outcomes include specific aspects of mental health such as depression, and fatigue and pain. Social outcomes include financial and employment burdens and problems with insurance. Donation-specific psychosocial outcomes include regret, satisfaction, feelings of abandonment and unmet needs, and benefits of living kidney donation. The experience of living donation is complex and multifaceted, reflected in the co-occurrence of both benefits and burden after donation. Noticeably, no interventions have been developed to improve mid- or long-term psychosocial outcomes among living donors. We highlight areas for methodological improvement and identified 3 areas requiring immediate attention from the transplant community in both research and clinical care: (1) recognizing and providing care for the minority of donors who have poorer long-term psychosocial outcomes after donation, (2) minimizing donation-related financial burden, and (3) studying interventions to minimize long-term psychosocial problems.

Fatigue in living kidney donors compared to a German general population sample: an exploratory study

Background

Clinical studies have not conclusively clarified whether fatigue scores in living kidney donors after donation are fundamentally different from general population samples. Moreover, the association between sociodemographic and donor specific factors and fatigue in donors is not well understood.

Patients and methods

Fatigue scores of 358 living kidney donors on average 7.67 years post-donation were compared with 1896 subjects from the German general population in five strata of age and sex. Fatigue was measured with the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20). Relationships between the five MFI-20 subscales and the sociodemographic variables sex, age, education, and in the donor sample also years since donation were calculated. Additionally, the association between donor specific variables and fatigue levels were analyzed.

Results

Overall, donors had lower fatigue scores than the population sample. Particularly the age group 65-74 and above reported significantly lower fatigue scores. A significant exception was found in women aged 45-54 years, where donors showed significant higher general fatigue scores than the corresponding subgroup of the general population sample. Multiple regression analyses in the general population sample revealed associations between female sex and higher age with higher values in most MFI-20 subscales, whereas subjects with higher education showed mostly lower fatigue scores. In the donor group, these associations were of little importance. Also, years since donation, partnership, and recipient group were not strongly related to fatigue. However, higher fatigue in donors was associated with more donation regret, a more negative relationship with the recipient, a more negatively perceived recipient health, less perceived family support, and more financial burden.

Conclusion

Fatigue is less prevalent particularly in older donors and predictors of fatigue presented in the general population sample seem to have little importance in the donors. However, middle-aged female donors might be more prone to develop fatigue. This group may require more intense exploration before and after donation to detect and treat the underlying factors timely.

Urologists' proficiency in various donor nephrectomy approaches: a real-life survey, systematic review, and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Donor nephrectomy (DN) is a unique surgical procedure in urological practice, as it involves exposing a healthy individual to the potential risks of surgery. This type of surgery exhibits heterogeneity in terms of approach (open, laparoscopic, or robotic), each with its unique set of advantages and disadvantages. Consequently, there is currently a lack of universally agreed upon clear guidelines. In these settings, this study aims to evaluate transplantation surgeons' knowledge through a real-life survey and compare it with data from published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The study is divided into two parts, with the first part focusing on the outcomes of the real-life survey designed to assess surgeons' knowledge about different DN approaches and their real-world practices during the surgery. The second part involves a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs, specifically examining the outcomes of different surgical approaches to DN. The systematic review followed the PRISMA Guidelines and involved a search of PubMed and Web of Science for RCTs comparing the outcomes of different DN approaches. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB-2 tool. The random effect model was mainly used to assess the mean difference of the included studies.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The study was conducted between July 2021 and January 2022 and surveyed 50 surgeons, of which 35 participants (70%) completed the survey. Regarding various approaches to DN, 97.14% of surgeons reported having experience with live DN, and 45.72% performed over 15 cases per year. The most performed approach was pure laparoscopic DN (68.57%). Pure laparoscopic DN was the preferred approach for 77.42% of respondents. The review process resulted in 335 articles, of which 35 were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. In summary, most studies found that laparoscopic approaches, including standard, hand-assisted, LESS-DN, and mini-LDN, resulted in less postoperative pain, better cosmetic, and quicker recovery times compared to open approaches. The main limitation of the current study is the heterogeneity of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The study provides valuable insights into the practices of renal transplantation surgeons, offering a comprehensive comparison to level 1 studies (RCTs) in the field. It underscores the continued significance of ODN in contemporary practice, particularly in light of recommendations from the EAU guidelines on renal transplantation. This reaffirms the need to consider the advantages and disadvantages of various approaches, including factors such as cost, postoperative pain, and cosmetic outcomes. While robotic-assisted DN holds promise, their adoption remains variable, potentially due to limited robust evidence.

Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy for live kidney donors

BACKGROUND

Waiting lists for kidney transplantation continue to grow. Live kidney donation significantly reduces waiting times and improves long-term outcomes for recipients. Major disincentives to potential kidney donors are the pain and morbidity associated with surgery. This is an update of a review published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of open donor nephrectomy (ODN), laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), hand-assisted LDN (HALDN) and robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) as appropriate surgical techniques for live kidney donors.

SEARCH METHODS

We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 31 March 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDN with ODN, HALDN, or RDN were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts for eligibility, assessed study quality, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information where necessary. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies randomising 1280 live kidney donors to ODN, LDN, HALDN, or RDN were included. All studies were assessed as having a low or unclear risk of bias for selection bias. Five studies had a high risk of bias for blinding. Seven studies randomised 815 live kidney donors to LDN or ODN. LDN was associated with reduced analgesia use (high certainty evidence) and shorter hospital stay, a longer procedure and longer warm ischaemia time (moderate certainty evidence). There were no overall differences in blood loss, perioperative complications, or need for operations (low or very low certainty evidence). Three studies randomised 270 live kidney donors to LDN or HALDN. There were no differences between HALDN and LDN for analgesia requirement, hospital stay (high certainty evidence), duration of procedure (moderate certainty evidence), blood loss, perioperative complications, or reoperations (low certainty evidence). The evidence for warm ischaemia time was very uncertain due to high heterogeneity. One study randomised 50 live kidney donors to retroperitoneal ODN or HALDN and reported less pain and analgesia requirements with ODN. It found decreased blood loss and duration of the procedure with HALDN. No differences were found in perioperative complications, reoperations, hospital stay, or primary warm ischaemia time. One study randomised 45 live kidney donors to LDN or RDN and reported a longer warm ischaemia time with RDN but no differences in analgesia requirement, duration of procedure, blood loss, perioperative complications, reoperations, or hospital stay. One study randomised 100 live kidney donors to two variations of LDN and reported no differences in hospital stay, duration of procedure, conversion rates, primary warm ischaemia times, or complications (not meta-analysed). The conversion rates to ODN were 6/587 (1.02%) in LDN, 1/160 (0.63%) in HALDN, and 0/15 in RDN. Graft outcomes were rarely or selectively reported across the studies. There were no differences between LDN and ODN for early graft loss, delayed graft function, acute rejection, ureteric complications, kidney function or one-year graft loss. In a meta-regression analysis between LDN and ODN, moderate certainty evidence on procedure duration changed significantly in favour of LDN over time (yearly reduction = 7.12 min, 95% CI 2.56 to 11.67; P = 0.0022). Differences in very low certainty evidence on perioperative complications also changed significantly in favour of LDN over time (yearly change in LnRR = 0.107, 95% CI 0.022 to 0.192; P = 0.014). Various different combinations of techniques were used in each study, resulting in heterogeneity among the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

LDN is associated with less pain compared to ODN and has comparable pain to HALDN and RDN. HALDN is comparable to LDN in all outcomes except warm ischaemia time, which may be associated with a reduction. One study reported kidneys obtained during RDN had greater warm ischaemia times. Complications and occurrences of perioperative events needing further intervention were equivalent between all methods.

Recommendations for living donor kidney transplantation

This Guide for Living Donor Kidney Transplantation (LDKT) has been prepared with the sponsorship of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SEN), the Spanish Transplant Society (SET), and the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). It updates evidence to offer the best chronic renal failure treatment when a potential living donor is available. The core aim of this Guide is to supply clinicians who evaluate living donors and transplant recipients with the best decision-making tools, to optimise their outcomes. Moreover, the role of living donors in the current KT context should recover the level of importance it had until recently. To this end the new forms of incompatible HLA and/or ABO donation, as well as the paired donation which is possible in several hospitals with experience in LDKT, offer additional ways to treat renal patients with an incompatible donor. Good results in terms of patient and graft survival have expanded the range of circumstances under which living renal donors are accepted. Older donors are now accepted, as are others with factors that affect the decision, such as a borderline clinical history or alterations, which when evaluated may lead to an additional number of transplantations. This Guide does not forget that LDKT may lead to risk for the donor. Pre-donation evaluation has to centre on the problems which may arise over the short or long-term, and these have to be described to the potential donor so that they are able take them into account. Experience over recent years has led to progress in risk analysis, to protect donors' health. This aspect always has to be taken into account by LDKT programmes when evaluating potential donors. Finally, this Guide has been designed to aid decision-making, with recommendations and suggestions when uncertainties arise in pre-donation studies. Its overarching aim is to ensure that informed consent is based on high quality studies and information supplied to donors and recipients, offering the strongest possible guarantees.

Results of the prospective multicenter SoLKiD Cohort Study indicate bio-psycho-social outcome risks to kidney donors 12 months after donation

The outcome after living kidney donation was assumed to be comparable to that of the general population. However, recent register studies reveal negative changes in kidney function, quality of life and fatigue. Avoiding methodological issues of previous studies, the Safety of the Living Kidney Donor (SoLKiD) cohort study analyzed the outcome of donors in a multicenter and interdisciplinary fashion. Donor data were collected pre-donation and two-, six- and 12-months post-donation in 20 German transplantation centers. Primary parameters were kidney function, quality of life, and fatigue. Secondary endpoints were blood pressure, hemoglobin, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index, depression and somatization. Parameters were analyzed with non-parametric statistical tests and a mixed model regression for changes in time, their clinical relevance and interaction encompassing 336 donors with mean age of 52 years. Most of the physical secondary parameters, depression, and quality of life showed little or no changes and regained their pre-donation level. Kidney function decreased significantly with a 37% loss of glomerular filtration rate and an increase of donors with chronic kidney disease stage 3 from 1.5% pre-donation to about 50%. Donors consistently showed increased fatigue and somatization. Mental fatigue increased from 10.6% to 28.1%. The main influencing factors for decreased kidney function and increased fatigue were their respective pre-donation levels, and donor age for kidney function and subject stress level in fatigue. Thus, our study showed that a significant number of donors developed clinically relevant changes in physical and mental health and emphasizes the urgent need to inform potential donors about these risks.

Hand-Assisted Retroperitoneoscopic Donor Nephrectomy Compared to Anterior Approach Open Donor Nephrectomy: Improved Long-Term Physical Component Score in Health-Related Quality of Life in Living Kidney Donors

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (HRQL), fatigue, anxiety, and depression are crucial for the living kidney donor (LKD). Follow-up data for HRQL of LKDs comparing surgical techniques, especially regarding hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP), are sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of abdominal wall trauma minimized by HARP in comparison to open anterior approach donor nephrectomy (AA) on HRQL and additional psychosocial aspects of LKDs during the long-term follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study comparing psychosocial aspects of LKD between HARP and AA.

RESULTS

This study included 100 LKDs (68 HARP, 28 AA, and 4 were excluded secondary to incomplete data). The time to follow-up was 22.6 ± 11.7 (HARP) vs 58.7 ± 13.9 (AA) months (P < .005). Complications ≥3a° due to Clavien-Dindo classification was 0% in both groups. There were higher scores in all physical aspects for HARP donors vs AA donors at that time (physical function: 89.8 ± 14.6 vs 80.0 ± 19.9, P = .008, and the physical component score: 53.9 ± 7.6 vs 48.6 ± 8.5, P = .006). One year later (follow-up time + 12 months), HRQL for HARP donors was still higher. Mental items showed no significant differences. HARP donors showed better physical scores compared to the age-matched nondonor population (AA donors had lower scores). Neither the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory-20 (MFI-20) or the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) showed any differences between the 2 groups. Fatigue scores were higher for HARP and for AA compared to the age-matched population.

CONCLUSIONS

LKDs undergoing HARP showed better physical performance as part of HRQL in the long-term follow-up.

Patterns and predictors of fatigue following living donor nephrectomy: Findings from the KDOC Study

This study sought to identify the prevalence, pattern, and predictors of clinical fatigue in 193 living kidney donors (LKDs) and 20 healthy controls (HCs) assessed at predonation and 1, 6, 12, and 24 months postdonation. Relative to HCs, LKDs had significantly higher fatigue severity (P = .01), interference (P = .03), frequency (P = .002), and intensity (P = .01), and lower vitality (P < .001), at 1-month postdonation. Using published criteria, significantly more LKDs experienced clinical fatigue at 1 month postdonation, compared to HCs, on both the Fatigue Symptom Inventory (60% vs. 37%, P < .001) and SF-36 Vitality scale (67% vs. 16%, P < .001). No differences in fatigue scores or clinical prevalence were observed at other time points. Nearly half (47%) reported persistent clinical fatigue from 1 to 6 months postdonation. Multivariable analyses demonstrated that LKDs presenting for evaluation with a history of affective disorder and low vitality, those with clinical mood disturbance and anxiety about future kidney failure after donation, and those with less physical activity engagement were at highest risk for persistent clinical fatigue 6 months postdonation. Findings confirm inclusion of fatigue risk in existing OPTN informed consent requirements, have important clinical implications in the care of LKDs, and underscore the need for further scientific examination in this population.

Living donor nephrectomy

OBJECTIVE

The Guidelines Project, an initiative of the Brazilian Medical Association, aims to combine information from the medical field in order to standardize producers to assist the reasoning and decision-making of doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

The information provided through this project must be assessed and criticized by the physician responsible for the conduct that will be adopted, depending on the conditions and the clinical status of each patient.

Multivariate Analysis of Health-related Quality of Life in Donors After Live Kidney Donation

BACKGROUND

Live-kidney donation has a low mortality rate. Evidence suggests that live-kidney donors experience a quality of life (QoL) comparable to or even superior to that of the general population. There is limited information on factors associated with a decrease in QoL in particular for baseline factors, which would improve information to the donor, donor selection, and convalescence.

METHODS

QoL data on 501 live donors included in three prospective studies between 2001 and 2010 were used. The 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) was used to measure QoL up to 1 year after the procedure. Longitudinal effects on both the mental (MCS) and physical component scales (PCS) were analyzed with multilevel linear regression analyses. Baseline variables were age, gender, body mass index (BMI), pain, operation type, and comorbidity. Other covariates were loss of the graft, glomerular filtration rate, and recipient complications.

RESULTS

After 1 year we observed a small decrease in PCS (effect size = -0.24), whereas the MCS increased (effect size = 0.32). Both PCS and MCS were still well above the norm of the general Dutch population. Factors associated with a change in PCS were BMI (Cohen's d = -0.17 for 5 BMI points) and age (d = -0.13 for each 10 years older).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, QoL after live-donor nephrectomy is excellent. A lowered PCS is related to age and body weight. Expectations towards a decreased postoperative QoL at 1 year are unjustified. However, one should keep in mind that older and obese donors may develop a reduced physical QoL after live-kidney donation.

Comparison of Both Sides for Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Experience From a Single Center in China

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has gradually become the main approach to obtain live donor kidneys. However, the shorter right renal vein limits its wider application. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of left- and right-side retroperitoneal LDN.

METHODS

We reviewed the perioperative data of 527 consecutive donors receiving retroperitoneal pure LDN with a new method at our center between April 2009 and April 2014. The patients were divided into group A (the first 100 patients) and group B (the remaining 427 patients). A total of 423 cases of left donor surgery and 104 cases of right donor surgery were compared. The comparison of the laterality of LDN was also performed between group A and group B.

RESULTS

This is currently the largest case series of LDN in our country. Although right-side LDN patients had longer operation time and a slightly higher incidence of intraoperative complications compared with left-side LDN patients, the operation time was shorter in both the groups compared with previous reports. In group B, patients undergoing right-side LDN had longer operation time and more frequent complications. Once the learning curve of 100 cases was completed, the incidence of complications and operation time were greatly reduced in both sides for LDN. There was no significant difference in the serum creatinine levels in recipients at 6 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a slightly higher incidence of complications and longer operation time, right-side LDN can achieve equally safe and effective transplantation outcomes. This expands the source of potential donor kidneys.

A randomized, prospective study of laparoendoscopic single-site plus one-port versus mini laparoscopic technique for live donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of laparoendoscopic single-site plus one-port donor nephrectomy (LESSOP-DN) and mini laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (MLDN).

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted from December 2014 to February 2016 in donors scheduled for left donor nephrectomy. Donor and recipient demographics and clinical outcomes including pain scores and questionnaires (BIQ: body image questionnaire, SF-36, patient-reported overall convalescence) were also compared.

RESULTS

A total of 121 eligible donors were recruited, of which 99 donors who were scheduled to undergo an operation on their left side were randomized into LESSOP-DN (n = 50) and MLDN (n = 49) groups. There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. The renal extraction time in the LESS-DN group was shorter than that in the MLDN group (75.89 ± 13.01 vs. 87.31 ± 11.38 min, p < 0.001). Other perioperative parameters and complication rates were comparable between the two groups. The LESSOP-DN group had a smaller incision length than the MLDN group (4.89 ± 0.68 vs. 6.21 ± 1.11 cm, p < 0.001), but cosmetic scores and body image scores were similar in the two groups (p = 0.905, 0.217). Donor quality of life (SF-36) and recovery and satisfaction data were comparable between the two groups. Delayed graft function (DGF) occurred in one recipient undergoing MLDN procedure (2.1%) and progressed to graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in cosmetic satisfaction between groups despite the smaller incision size of LESSOP-DN. Safety parameters and subjective measures of postoperative morbidity were similar between the two groups.

Five-year follow-up after live donor nephrectomy - cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of a prospective cohort within the era of extended donor eligibility criteria

To establish the outcome of live kidney donors 5 years after donation, we investigated the risk for progressive renal function decline and quality of life (QoL). Data on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), creatinine, hypertension, QoL and survival were assessed in a prospective cohort of 190 donors, who donated between 2008 and 2010. Data were available for >90%. The mean age predonation was 52.8 ± 11.5 years, 30 donors having pre-existent hypertension. The mean follow-up was 5.1 ± 0.9 years. Eight donors had died due to non-donation-related causes. After 5 years, the mean eGFR was 60.2 (95% CI 58.7-62.7) ml/min/1.73 m² , with a median serum creatinine of 105.1 (95% CI 102.5-107.8) μmol/l. eGFR decreased to 33.6% and was longitudinally lower among men than women and declining with age (P < 0.001), without any association on QoL. Donors with pre-existent and new-onset hypertension demonstrated no progressive decline of renal function overtime compared to nonhypertensives. No donors were found with proteinuria, microalbuminuria or at risk for end-stage renal disease. After an initial decline postdonation, renal function remained unchanged overtime. Men and ageing seem to affect renal function overtime, while decreased renal function did not affect QoL. These data support further stimulation of living kidney donation programmes as seen from the perspective of donor safety.

More than a decade after live donor nephrectomy: a prospective cohort study

Previously reported short-term results after live kidney donation show no negative consequences for the donor. The incidence of new-onset morbidity takes years to emerge, making it highly likely that this will be missed during short-term follow-up. Therefore, evidence on long-term outcome is essential. A 10-year follow-up on renal function, hypertension, quality of life (QOL), fatigue, and survival was performed of a prospective cohort of 100 donors. After a median follow-up time of 10 years, clinical data were available for 97 donors and QOL data for 74 donors. Nine donors died during follow-up of unrelated causes to donation, and one donor was lost to follow-up. There was a significant decrease in kidney function of 12.9 ml/min (P < 0.001) at follow-up. QOL showed significant clinically relevant decreases of 10-year follow-up scores in SF-36 dimensions of physical function (P < 0.001), bodily pain (P = 0.001), and general health (P < 0.001). MFI-20 scores were significantly higher for general fatigue (P < 0.001), physical fatigue (P < 0.001), reduced activity (P = 0.019), and reduced motivation (P = 0.030). New-onset hypertension was present in 25.6% of the donors. Donor outcomes are excellent 10 years post-donation. Kidney function appears stable, and hypertension does not seem to occur more frequently compared to the general population.

A meta-analysis of renal outcomes in living kidney donors

Given the increased burden of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), renal outcomes of kidney donation by living donors are of particular interest. PubMed, ProQuest, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Chinese national knowledge infrastructure, and Wanfang databases were searched for clinical outcomes of living kidney donors (LKDs) including renal death, ESRD, proteinuria/albuminuria, and renal function after donation. We included 62 studies from 19 countries involving 114,783 kidney donors and nondonors to evaluate the renal consequences less than 6 months, 6 months to 5 years, 5 to 10 years, and 10 years onward after donation. The pooled data showed that uninephrectomy significantly decreased glomerular filtration rate and creatinine clearance rate in parallel with increased serum creatinine concentration (all P < 0.05). The drastic changes in renal function occurred within 6 months rather than 5 to 10 years after donation. Ten years and onward, rate of proteinuria/albuminuria increased gradually: microalbuminuria from 5.3% to 20.9%, proteinuria from 4.7% to 18.9%, and overt proteinuria from 2.4% to 5.7% (all P < 0.05). Prevalence of ESRD was 1.1%. All-cause mortality was 3.8% and all the renal deaths on average occurred 10 years postnephrectomy. LKDs might have aggravated glomerular filtration and creatinine clearance within 6 months after donation. Five years and onward, albuminuria, proteinuria, ESRD, and death might be the major concerns of LKDs. Long-term studies may clarify the survival time after donation.

Exploring Knowledge About Dialysis, Transplantation, and Living Donation Among Patients and Their Living Kidney Donors

Background

In order to make a well-considered decision and give informed consent about renal replacement therapy, potential living kidney donors and recipients should have sufficient understanding of the options and risks.

Purpose

We aimed to explore knowledge about Dialysis & Transplantation (DT) and Living Donation (LD) among prospective living kidney donors and recipients.

Methods

Eighty-five donors and 81 recipients completed the Rotterdam Renal Replacement Knowledge-Test (R3K-T) 1 day before surgery. The questionnaire was available in various languages.

Results

Recipients knew significantly more about DT than donors (p < 0.001); donors knew more about LD than recipients (p < 0.001). A minority of donors (15 %) and recipients (17 %) had a score that was comparable to the knowledge level of the naïve general population. Recipients and donors knew less about DT and LD if their native language was not Dutch. In addition, recipients knew less about DT if they were undergoing pre-emptive transplantation.

Conclusions

We conclude that recipients and donors retain different information. The decision to undergo living donation appears to be not always based on full knowledge of the risks. We recommend that professionals assess knowledge of prospective donors and recipients during the education process using the R3K-T, and extra attention is required for non-native speakers.

LOng-term follow-up after liVE kidney donation (LOVE) study: a longitudinal comparison study protocol

Background

The benefits of live donor kidney transplantation must be balanced against the potential harm to the donor. Well-designed prospective studies are needed to study the long-term consequences of kidney donation.

Methods

The “LOng-term follow-up after liVE kidney donation” (LOVE) study is a single center longitudinal cohort study on long-term consequences after living kidney donation. We will study individuals who have donated a kidney from 1981 through 2010 in the Erasmus University Medical Center in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. In this time period, 1092 individuals donated a kidney and contact information is available for all individuals. Each participating donor will be matched (1:4) to non-donors derived from the population-based cohort studies of the Rotterdam Study and the Study of Health in Pomerania. Matching will be based on baseline age, gender, BMI, ethnicity, kidney function, blood pressure, pre-existing co-morbidity, smoking, the use of alcohol and highest education degree. Follow-up data is collected on kidney function, kidney-related comorbidity, mortality, quality of life and psychological outcomes in all participants.

Discussion

This study will provide evidence on the long-term consequences of live kidney donation for the donor compared to matched non-donors and evaluate the current donor eligibility criteria.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register NTR3795.

Long-term, self-reported health outcomes in kidney donors

Background

The wide use of healthy persons as kidney donors calls for awareness of risks associated with donation. Live kidney donation may impair quality of life (QOL) and result in fatigue. Long-term data on these issues are generally lacking in the donor population. Thus we aimed to investigate long-term self-reported health outcomes in a nationwide donor cohort.

Methods

We assessed self-reported QOL, fatigue and psychosocial issues after donation in 217 donors representing 63 % of those who donated 8–12 years ago. QOL was measured using the generic Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), fatigue using the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) and psychosocial issues using donor specific questions. For each of the 8 domains of SF-36 and the 5 domains of MFI, we performed generalized linear regression.

Results

Donors scored high on QOL with mean scores between 63.9 and 91.4 (scale 1–100) for the 8 subscales. Recognition from family and friends was associated with higher QOL scores in four domains. There were no significant gender differences. Fatigue scores were generally low. Females generally scored higher than males on all five dimensions of fatigue, although significantly only on two. Recipient still alive was associated with lower scores on mental fatigue. Regretting donors scored higher than average on all domains of fatigue. Recipient death, worries about own health and worsened relationship with the recipient influenced willingness to donate in retrospect. Donor age did not affect long-term health outcomes.

Conclusions

Eight till 12 years after donation QOL scores were generally high and improved with recogniton from family and friends. Fatigue was independent of donor age and more pronounced in females and in those who regretted donation.

The Course and Predictors of Health-Related Quality of Life in Living Kidney Donors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

A better understanding of the course and risk factors for impaired long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL; ie, physical, psychological, and social-relational functioning) after kidney donation might help clinicians improve the care of live kidney donors. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarizes prospective studies about the course and predictors of HRQoL in living kidney donors. Studies indicate that shortly after donation, donors have lower HRQoL, with minor to moderate changes in psychological and social-relational functioning and major changes in physical functioning. At 3-12 months after donation, HRQoL returned to baseline or was slightly reduced, particularly for fatigue, but scores were still comparable to general population norms. Results were mainly robust across surgery techniques. A limited number of studies examined risk factors for impaired HRQoL, with low psychological functioning before donation as the most consistent predictor. Based on these results, clinicians can inform potential donors that, on average, kidney donors have high long-term HRQoL; however, donors with low psychological functioning at baseline are those most at risk of impaired long-term HRQoL. Future studies should focus on other potentially relevant predictors of postdonation HRQoL, including donor eligibility criteria and donor-recipient relationships, to optimize screening and interventions for donors at risk.

Ancillary personnel in Spanish and Latin-American hospitals faced with living related kidney donation

INTRODUCTION

Ancillary hospital personnel represent an important body of opinion because as they work in a hospital their opinion has more credibility for the general public as a result of their activity in hospitals. However, in most cases they do not have any health care training which means that their attitude could be based on a lack of knowledge or unfounded fears.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the attitude toward living kidney donation (LKD) among ancillary personnel in Spanish and Latin-American hospitals and to analyze the variables that might influence such attitude.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

from «International Collaborative Donor Project» a random sample was taken among ancillary personnel in Spain, Mexico and Cuba hospitals. Attitude towards LKD was evaluated using a validated, anonymously filled and self-administered survey.

RESULTS

951 professionals were surveyed (Spain: 277, Mexico: 632, Cuba: 42). 89% (n=850) are in favor of related kidney donation, lowering to 31% (n=289) in non-related donation. Of the rest, 8% (n=78) are not in favor and the 3% (n=23) are unsure. By country, Cubans (98%) and Mexicans (91%) are more in favour than Spanish (84%) (P=.001). The following variables are related to favourable attitude towards LKD: female sex (P=.017), university degree (P=.010), work in health services (P=.035), labour stability (P=.016), personal experience in donation and transplantation (P=.001), positive attitude toward cadaveric donation (P<.001), belief that he or she might need a transplant in the future (P<.001), positive attitude towards living liver donation (P<.001), a willingness to receive a donated living liver if needed (P<.001), having discussed the subject of organ donation and transplantation within the family (P<.001), partner's positive attitude towards the subject (P<.001), participation in voluntary type pro-social activities (P=.002) and not being concerned about possible mutilation after donation (P<.001) CONCLUSIONS: The attitude toward living related kidney donation is favourable among ancillary personnel in Spanish and Latin-Americans hospitals. Because living donation is a better source of organs than cadaveric ones, this favourable predisposition can be used as promoting agent of living donation in order to develop it in Spanish-speaking countries.

Comparison of the laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: an overview of surgical complications and outcome

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation (KTx) is considered to be the treatment of choice for end stage renal disease. One of the most challenging dilemmas in KTx is the shortage of suitable organs. The live donor nephrectomy is considered a unique operation performed on healthy donors, which provides a superior outcome in the recipients. Several surgical techniques have been developed so far to minimize donor postoperative complications as much as possible without compromising the quality of the kidney. The development of a minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LDN), was based on this concept.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

By searching the pubmed, we reviewed the most evidence based clinical studies specifically randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses to give an overview of the efficacy and safety of LDN versus ODN.

RESULTS

The advantages of a LDN vs. a conventional open donor nephrectomy (ODN) are a smaller incision, better wound cosmetics, a lower rate of incisional hernia and adhesion, less postoperative pain, shorter hospitalization, and earlier return to work. Some concerns are longer operative and warm ischemic times, long-term learning curve for surgeons, and the risk of more serious complications than during an ODN.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the review of literature shows that a LDN provides less postoperative pain, a shorter hospital stay, a shorter period of rehabilitation, and earlier return to normal work and physical activities in comparison to the conventional open flank nephrectomy but is comparable to the mini muscle splitting approach. The complication rate is generally lower in centers accustomed to performing LDNs; however, complications can be life threatening and could impose significant costs to the health system. Weighing the longer operation and warm ischemic time, as well as the risk of more serious complications against the advantages of a LDN mandates a precise indication. The risk-benefit assessment for choosing one procedure should be done meticulously. Even though the short-term graft function in both techniques is comparable, there is a lack of enough long-term outcome analyses. Finally, in any transplant center, the cost of the laparoscopic procedure should be considered.

Evolution of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a single-center experience with 1510 cases over 14 years

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the outcomes of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and proposed modifications for kidney donation surgery. From February 1997 to February 2011, 1510 LDNs were performed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Surgical modifications included a modified open access technique for entry into the abdominal cavity, using vascular clips for safe and cost-effective control of the renal pedicle, control of the lumbar veins, and adrenal vein using bipolar cautery instead of clips, and leaving the gonadal vein intact with the ureter. Kidneys were extracted by hand through a Pfannenstiel incision. Heparin was not used after the first 300 cases to prevent potential hemorrhagic complications.

RESULTS

Although three major vascular injuries occurred using the closed access method that were managed successfully, no access-related complications occurred using the modified open access technique. Clip failure did not happen in any cases. Patient and graft survival at 1 year post-transplantation were 96.5% and 95.5%, respectively, and at 5 years post-transplantation were 95.3% and 89.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The proposed surgical modifications are based on 14 years of experience and 1510 cases, and make LDN simple, safe, and cost-effective. The excellent recipient and graft outcomes with minimal morbidity obtained further confirm that LDN can be considered as the gold standard for kidney donation surgery.

A prospective study on living related kidney donors' quality of life in the first year: choosing appropriate reference data

Prospective studies on living kidney donors' quality of life (QoL) are still rare. Most existing studies compare healthy donors with the general population, including subjects with diseases. This is the first prospective study comparing living donors' QoL with reference data of both the general population and healthy individuals. We investigated QoL, anxiety, and depression in living kidney donors (n = 79) before donation and at two post-operative data points (three months and one yr). Subsequently, data from the donors were compared with the reference data. Our results show an impaired physical QoL three months post-donation. One yr after surgery, physical QoL had returned to the pre-operative level. Neither mental QoL nor anxiety or depression showed major changes across time. Pre-operative QoL was comparable to that of healthy individuals and higher than that in the general population. Donors' perception of the recipient's health showed moderate correlations with donors' mental outcome three months after donation. In conclusion, the impact on physical QoL seems to persist for at least three months after kidney donation. It could be demonstrated that in the context of living donation, healthy individuals provide more adequate reference data. Future research needs to determine the length and the nature of the post-operative QoL impairment and further explore possible influencing factors.

Prevention of poor psychosocial outcomes in living organ donors: from description to theory-driven intervention development and initial feasibility testing

CONTEXT

Although some living donors experience psychological, somatic, and interpersonal difficulties after donation, interventions to prevent such outcomes have not been developed or evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To (1) summarize empirical evidence on psychosocial outcomes after donation, (2) describe a theoretical framework to guide development of an intervention to prevent poor outcomes, and (3) describe development and initial evaluation of feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.

METHODS

Based on a narrative literature review suggesting that individuals ambivalent about donation are at risk for poor psychosocial outcomes after donation, the intervention targeted this risk factor. Intervention structure and content drew on motivational interviewing principles in order to assist prospective donors to resolve ambivalence. Data were collected on donors' characteristics at our institution to determine whether they constituted a representative population in which to evaluate the intervention. Study participants were then recruited to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. They were required to have scores greater than 0 on the Simmons Ambivalence Scale (indicating at least some ambivalence about donation).

RESULTS

Our population was similar to the national living donor population on most demographic and donation-related characteristics. Eight individuals who had been approved to donate either a kidney or liver segment were enrolled for pilot testing of the intervention. All successfully completed the 2-session telephone-based intervention before scheduled donation surgery. Participants' ratings of acceptability and satisfaction were high. Open-ended comments indicated that the intervention addressed participants' thoughts and concerns about the decision to donate.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention is feasible, acceptable, and appears relevant to donor concerns. A clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of the intervention is warranted.

Pediatric open partial nephrectomy: analysis of contemporary outcomes with a supracostal-12 approach

OBJECTIVE

Reports in the literature increasingly have demonstrated a shorter length of stay (LOS) with the laparoscopic approach to partial nephrectomy compared to historic open partial nephrectomy. We present data from the largest open series to date, to provide a more contemporary perspective.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on all pediatric patients who underwent upper pole partial nephrectomy from 1999 to 2011. Using univariate and multivariate linear regression, the associations between multiple explanatory covariates and outcomes such as pain and length of stay were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five surgeries were performed via a supracostal-12 approach. The mean incision length and operative time was 3.7 cm and 137 min, respectively. The average pain score was 1.7/10 and 72% of patients did not require morphine. The mean LOS was 36 h and all patients with postoperative imaging had normal blood flow. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a later date of surgery was the only covariate significantly associated with decreased operative time and LOS.

CONCLUSION

Open partial nephrectomy can be performed in a minimally invasive manner via a small supracostal-12 incision with minimal pain and LOS. Surgeon experience is associated with decreased operative time and LOS. These contemporary open results should be considered when comparisons are made with laparoscopic surgery.

Long-term graft function in a randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the long-term graft and survival rates in kidney transplant recipients who had undergone laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus those who underwent open donor nephrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our study was done with 100 cases of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and 100 cases of open donor nephrectomy, performed between July 2001 and September 2003. Mean follow-up of recipients in this study was 6.6 ± 2.4 years (range, 1-9.3 y). This study has a longer follow-up than previous randomized clinical trials. We compared patient and graft survival in recipients of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus those who had open donor nephrectomy.

RESULTS

Mean duration of kidney warm ischemia time was 8.7 ± 2.7 minutes for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and 1.8 ± 0.92 minutes for open donor nephrectomy. There were no significant differences in 5-year graft survival between the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and open donor nephrectomy groups (89.5% vs 84.3%; P = .96). There were no differences in delayed graft function between the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and open donor nephrectomy groups (8 and 11 patients; P = .135). There was a significant difference in 5-year graft survival between recipients with a history of delayed graft function and those without delayed graft function (63.2% vs 89.7%; P = .04). Despite a longer warm ischemia time in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy group (8.69 vs 1.87 min; P = .0001), warm ischemia time had no effect on graft outcome in long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Although earlier experiences with laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were associated with concerns about long-term effects of laparoscopic donation on the graft function in the recipient, our long-term results confirm that laparoscopic donor nephrectomy provides similar graft outcome to open donor nephrectomy.

Living kidney donor follow-up: state-of-the-art and future directions

Long-term living kidney donor follow-up has not been considered necessary by many living kidney donor programs because a large number of single-center studies show that living kidney donation is associated with minimal mortality and morbidity. However, some transplant professionals and, more importantly, living donors disagree. To evaluate the need for more data on living kidney donor outcomes, a conference was held in September 2010 (Leichtman and colleagues: Am J Transplant 11: 2561-2568, 2011). Participants were health care professionals, living donors, members of the United Network for Organ Sharing, Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, and insurance companies. This article will discuss the status of living donor follow-up in the context of the follow-up conference. It will also provide a slightly different viewpoint of provider responsibility for donor follow-up than that presented by the conference report.

Laparoscopic-Assisted Recipient Nephrectomy and Recipient Kidney Procurement during Orthotopic Living-Related Kidney Transplantation

Advanced atherosclerosis or thrombosis of iliac vessels can constitute an absolute contraindication for heterotopic kidney transplantation. We report the case of a 42-year-old women with end-stage renal disease due to lupus nephritis and a history of bilateral thrombosis of iliac arteries caused by antiphospholipid antibodies. Occlusion had been treated by the bilateral placement of wall stents which precluded vascular anastomosis. The patient was transplanted with a right kidney procured by laparoscopic nephrectomy from her HLA semi-identical sister. The recipient had left nephrectomy after laparoscopical transperitoneal dissection. The donor kidney was orthotopically transplanted with end-to-end anastomosis of graft vessels to native renal vessels and of the graft and native ureter. Although, the patient received full anticoagulation because of a cardiac valve and antiphospholipid antibodies, she had no postoperative complication in spite of a short period of delayed graft function. Serum creatinine levels three months after transplantation were at 1.0 mg/dl. Our case documents that orthotopical transplantation of laparoscopically procured living donor kidneys at the site of recipient nephrectomy is a feasible procedure in patients with surgical contraindication of standard heterotopic kidney transplantation.