1
|
Calpin GG, Hehir C, Davey MG, MacCurtain BM, Little D, Davis NF. Right and left living donor nephrectomy and operative approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis of donor and recipient outcomes. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2024:100880. [PMID: 39244429 DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2024.100880] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2024] [Revised: 08/26/2024] [Accepted: 08/28/2024] [Indexed: 09/09/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The left kidney is preferable in living donor nephrectomy (LDN). We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of right versus left LDN in both donor and recipients. A subgroup analysis of outcomes based on operative approach was also performed. METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. Outcomes of interest were extracted from included studies and analysed. RESULTS There were 31 studies included with 79,912 transplants. Left LDN was performed in 84.1 % of cases and right LDN in 15.9 %. Right LDN was associated with reduced EBL (P = 0.010), intra-operative complications (P = 0.030) and operative time (P = 0.006), but higher rates of conversion to open surgery (1.4 % vs 0.9 %). However, right living donor renal transplantation (LDRT) had higher rates of delayed graft function (5.4 % vs 4.2 %, P < 0.0001) and graft loss (2.6 % vs 1.1 %, P < 0.0001). Graft survival was reduced in right LDRT at 3 years (92.0 % vs 94.2 %, P = 0.001) but comparable to left LDRT at 1- and 5-years. Otherwise, donor and recipient peri-operative outcomes and serum creatinine levels were comparable in both groups. Hand-assisted LDN was associated with shorter warm ischaemia time (P < 0.0001) but longer length of stay (LOS) than laparoscopic LDN and robotic-assisted LDN (P < 0.0001). RA-LDN was associated with less EBL and shorter LOS (both P < 0.0001) while patients who underwent L-LDN had a lower mean serum creatinine (SCr) level on discharge (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION Right LDRT has higher rates of delayed graft function and graft loss compared to left LDRT. Minimally-invasive surgical approaches potentially offer improved outcomes but further large-scale randomised controlled trials studies are required to confirm this finding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gavin G Calpin
- Department of Urology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin, Ireland.
| | - Cian Hehir
- Department of Urology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Matthew G Davey
- Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin, Ireland
| | | | - Dilly Little
- Department of Urology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Niall F Davis
- Department of Urology, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, Ireland; Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St Stephens Green, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Huang H, Qiu Y, Liu G, Liu X, Lin X, Wu X, Xie W, Yang X, Kong W, Chen J. Robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal donor nephrectomy: a safe and efficient improvement. World J Urol 2024; 42:243. [PMID: 38639784 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04939-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2023] [Accepted: 03/20/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Reducing operative injuries is important in living donor nephrectomy. The robot-assisted transperitoneal approach has some advantages than traditional laparoscopic techniques. However, longer operation time and risks of abdominal complications indicate the need for improved techniques. The aim of this study is to present the robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal donor nephrectomy and evaluate its safety and feasibility. METHODS This was a retrospective study. From June 2016 to December 2020, 218 living donors underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal donor nephrectomy. Perioperative data such as operation time, warm ischemia time, length of stay and complications were collected and analyzed. To evaluate the feasibility of this surgical technique, the cumulative summation method was used to construct a learning curve. RESULTS There were 60 male and 158 female donors aged 36-72 years, with an average age of 53.1 ± 6.8 years. Three patients (1.4%) were converted to open surgery. The mean operation time was 115.4 ± 41.9 min, the warm ischemia time was 206.6 ± 146.7 s, and the length of stay was 4.1 ± 1.4 days. Complications were reported in 22 patients (10.1%), three of whom (1.4%) had Clavien‒Dindo IIIa complications. No ileus occurred. No donors were readmitted. Four patients had delayed graft function. The cumulative summation curve showed that the number needed to reach proficiency was 33. The operation time and warm ischemia time after technical proficiency were 100.4 ± 21.6 min and 142.5 ± 50.7 s, respectively. CONCLUSION Robot-assisted laparoscopic retroperitoneal donor nephrectomy is a safe and efficient technique that offers advantages of shorter operation time and no abdominal organ interference.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hongfeng Huang
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Yingyin Qiu
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Guangjun Liu
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xinyu Liu
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xiaoli Lin
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xiaoying Wu
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Wenqing Xie
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Xiuyan Yang
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Weiwei Kong
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China
| | - Jianghua Chen
- Kidney Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, 79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang, China.
- Key Laboratory of Kidney Disease Prevention and Control Technology, Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
- National Key Clinical Department of Kidney Diseases, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
- Institute of Nephrology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
- Zhejiang Clinical Research Center of Kidney and Urinary System Disease, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Karayagiz AH, Besli S, Yilmaz G, Ozdemir E, Cakir U, Berber I. Long-term outcomes of left versus right laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with multiple renal arteries. Eur Surg Res 2022; 63:46-54. [PMID: 35100577 DOI: 10.1159/000522315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2021] [Accepted: 01/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The objective of this study is to compare the long-term graft outcomes of left versus right donor nephrectomy with multiple renal arteries, and therefore creating a reference for the expansion of the potential living kidney donor pool. METHODS Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy cases between May 2010 and October 2020 were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. The data relating to donor and recipient demographics, surgical and anatomical characteristics, recipient and graft status were retrieved and compared using nonparametric statistical methods and multivariate regression. Analyses were fit for survival factors. RESULTS A total of 1009 recipients were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study with their donors. 16.7% of the donors had been discovered to have more than one renal artery supplying the donated kidney. The acute rejection rate was 12.8%. Death-censored graft survival at post-operative year 5 for single renal artery transplants was 89.6%, 89.5% for left-sided multiple renal arteries, and 88.2% for right-sided ones. CONCLUSIONS Both right donor nephrectomy and left donor nephrectomy are safe procedures with no significant negatively impacted rates for neither survival nor complications of the recipients in the long-term, compared to single renal artery ones.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abdulhak Hamit Karayagiz
- Department of General Surgery, Istanbul Esenyurt Necmi Kadioglu Public Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Sevval Besli
- Department of General Surgery, Acibadem University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Gulay Yilmaz
- Department of Nephrology, Kidney Transplantation Center, Acibadem International Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ebru Ozdemir
- Department of General Surgery, Kidney Transplantation Center, Acibadem International Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ulkem Cakir
- Department of Nephrology, Acibadem University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ibrahim Berber
- Department of General Surgery, Acibadem University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|