Search

Background: Currently, either Hem-o-lok (HOL) clip or stapler is being used to control the renal vein in laparoscopic right living donor nephrectomy. The study aims to compare the quality of renal vein retrieved using either HOL clip or Endo TA 30 stapler (TAS) in laparoscopic right living donor nephrectomies. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the perioperative data of right-living donor nephrectomies performed at our institute. For the venous control, either two HOL clips (15 mm) or an Endo TA-30 stapler (30 mm–2.5 mm, 3 rows of staples) were used. Perioperative variables from both the donor group and corresponding recipients were recorded and analyzed. A Student’s t-test was used to compare. Results: HOL was applied in 48 (n1) and TAS in 78 (n2) donors, for the control of renal vein. The retrieved length of right renal vein was significantly longer in TAS than in HOL (2.28 ± 0.24 vs. 1.76 ± 0.12 cm, P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in warm ischemia time (5.82 ± 0.89 vs. 5.86 ± 0.91 min, P = 0.84), blood loss (103.65 ± 33.00 vs. 103.64 ± 33.62 mL, P = 0.87), and total surgery duration (139.74 ± 25.83 vs. 140.41 ± 26.33 min, P = 0.86) in both the group. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in postoperative diuresis, acute tubular necrosis, and serum creatinine at 3 months (1.01 ± 0.20 vs. 0.97 ± 0.19 mg/dL, P = 0.67) in corresponding recipients. Conclusion: Endo TAS provides a comparatively longer allograft vein along with an edge of the inferior vena cava than the HOL clip.

Background: Right living donor nephrectomy is technically more demanding because of the anatomical differences. Patient safety is the utmost priority because it is performed on healthy donors. We hereby describe our experiences with surgical modifications to minimize donor morbidity and overcome surgical challenges in the cases of right living donor nephrectomy. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, we analyzed the prospectively maintained perioperative and follow-up data of standard and modified right living donor nephrectomies performed in the recent past 10 years at our institute. We also compared the significant events in corresponding recipients. Student's t-tests were used to define statistical significance. Results: A total of 1530 laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies were performed between 2012 and 2021, of which 117 were on the right side. Of them, 62 donors underwent modified right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (MRLDN) and 55 underwent standard right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The mean duration of surgery (103.44 ± 14.59 vs. 139.45 ± 25.99 min), warm ischemia time (4.30 ± 0.59 vs. 5.89 ± 0.91 min), and blood loss (90.24 ± 24.75 vs. 103.72 ± 33.37 mL) were significantly lower in modified as compared to standard donor nephrectomy (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative diuresis, acute tubular necrosis, and serum creatinine at 3 months in the corresponding recipient group. Conclusion: MRLDN is a safe, reliable, and reproducible technique of right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Long-term results of renal transplantation from living donors are much better than the results of cadaveric transplantations. Recently, because of the shortage of living donors, some centers have started using kidneys from living donors with asymptomatic stones as a potential solution for the problem. However, the optimal surgical solution for such situations has not yet been developed.Aim. To evaluate our obtained transplantation results of using the kidneys from living donors with nephrolithiasis and compare them with the literature data.Material and methods. In the period from 2012-2021, renal transplantations in our clinic were done in three patients from related donors with stones in the kidney. One donor underwent mini-percutaneous lithotripsy one month prior to nephrectomy. The other two underwent simultaneous retrograde lithotripsy and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. In these cases a holmium or thulium laser was used for the destruction of calculi. All donors underwent laparoscopic retroperitoneal nephrectomy.Results. All stones were successfully removed. There were no surgical complications in donors during and after procedures. Warm ischemia time did not exceed 3.5 minutes. The general length of hospital stay was 10 days in case of predonation stone removal surgery and 6 and 4 days in the cases of simultaneous procedures, respectively. All grafts were transplanted to related recipients. One of the recipients was treated with hemodialysis before transplantation, the other one with peritoneal dialysis. The third recipient underwent preemptive transplantation (before the start of dialysis). The graft function in all cases was immediate. During the follow-up period (9-57 months), no signs of nephrolithiasis were seen in either donors, or recipients.Conclusions. Consideration of potential donors with stones in one kidney might increase the number of living donor renal transplantation. Simultaneous RIRS and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy can be considered as an alternative to sequential operations or ex vivo stone extraction. The presented technique is reproducible, safe and was not associated with an increased length of hospital stay.

Background: Right living donor nephrectomy is technically more demanding because of the anatomical differences. Patient safety is the utmost priority because it is performed on healthy donors. We hereby describe our experiences with surgical modifications to minimize donor morbidity and overcome surgical challenges in the cases of right living donor nephrectomy. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, we analyzed the prospectively maintained perioperative and follow-up data of standard and modified right living donor nephrectomies performed in the recent past 10 years at our institute. We also compared the significant events in corresponding recipients. Student's t-tests were used to define statistical significance. Results: A total of 1530 laparoscopic living donor nephrectomies were performed between 2012 and 2021, of which 117 were on the right side. Of them, 62 donors underwent modified right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (MRLDN) and 55 underwent standard right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The mean duration of surgery (103.44 ± 14.59 vs. 139.45 ± 25.99 min), warm ischemia time (4.30 ± 0.59 vs. 5.89 ± 0.91 min), and blood loss (90.24 ± 24.75 vs. 103.72 ± 33.37 mL) were significantly lower in modified as compared to standard donor nephrectomy (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative diuresis, acute tubular necrosis, and serum creatinine at 3 months in the corresponding recipient group. Conclusion: MRLDN is a safe, reliable, and reproducible technique of right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is the current gold standard in kidney donation. Mini-incision open donor nephrectomy (MINI) techniques have been used extensively but have become less popular. The aim of the present study was to compare the results and safety of a non-muscle-splitting MINI technique with the current gold standard of LDN. A single center retrospective cohort study of all living donor nephrectomies between 2011 and 2019 was used for the study. The primary outcome of this study was short term (

Abstract Background Kidney transplantation is the definitive treatment for end stage renal disease (ESRD), offering improved quality of life and survival benefit over remaining on dialysis. There is, however, a prevailing significant mismatch between patients awaiting transplantation and available donor kidneys. Over time, initial stringent donor criteria have broadened and organs from extended criteria donors (ECDs) and older donors are now being accepted for transplantation. The spectrum of living donors has also undergone a change from close family members to an increasingly non-related, non-directed altruistic donors, newly classified as ‘unspecified’ donors. Unspecified elderly donors could be a potential untapped resource to expanding the kidney donor pool globally. Case Presentation We present a case of an 85 year and 8 months old individual, who donated to an unrelated non-directed matched recipient in the national deceased donor transplant waiting list with excellent donor and recipient outcomes at 7 years. Conclusion To our knowledge she is one of the oldest reported unspecified living kidney donors in the world to date. This case illustrates that elderly donors in good health can come forward to donate, knowing that it is safe and valuable. Once the immediate perioperative challenges after kidney donation are managed, elderly donors rarely encounter long term sequelae. We therefore report this case to increase awareness and refocus attention of transplant teams on elderly donors as a potential untapped group to help address the organ shortage problem in renal transplantation.

Background : As the number of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients is increasing, but there are not enough living donors, it is necessary to broaden the criteria for candidates who can undergo donor nephrectomy. Thanks to surgeons' increasing experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LND), multiple renal artery grafts, previously considered a relative contraindication to donor nephrectomy, have become candidates for LDN. We aimed to compare the outcomes of donors and recipients with single artery and with multiple arteries in LDN. Methods: A total of 214 patients were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the number of donor arteries: donors with one artery (group 1) and donors with multiple arteries (group 2). The number of donor arteries, operative time, warm ischemia time (WIT), cold ischemia time (CIT), arterial anastomosis time, venous anastomosis time, the extent of bleeding, and preoperative complications were recorded to evaluate the preoperative data. Results: The mean operation time in group 1 was 90.3 ± 11.8 min, while in group 2, it was 102.1 ± 5.5 min (p = 0.000). WIT group 1 was 90.9 ± 4.3 s and group 2 100.6 ± 2.1 s (p = 0.000). Arterial anastomosis time was 12.25 ± 3.8 in group 1 and 22.5 ± 4.5 in group 2 (p = 0.000). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups in other parameters. Conlusion: Increasing the number of donor arteries in renal transplantation (RT) operations prolonged the operation time on both the donor and recipient sides. Still, it had no negative impact on complications or graft function in the postoperative period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is the current gold standard in kidney donation. Mini-incision open donor nephrectomy (MINI) techniques have been used extensively but have become less popular. The aim of the present study was to compare the results and safety of a non-muscle-splitting MINI technique with the current gold standard of LDN. A single center retrospective cohort study of all living donor nephrectomies between 2011 and 2019 was used for the study. The primary outcome of this study was short term (<30 days) with Clavien–Dindo grade complications. Secondary outcomes included multivariable regression analysis of perioperative data. No differences in complication rates were observed between MINI and LDN and also after correction for known confounders. As expected, the operative time and first warm ischemia were significantly shorter in the MINI group and less blood loss was observed in the LDN group. Complications and conversion rate (LDN to open) among the LDN patients were in line with recent published meta-analyses. This study confirms the perioperative safety of living kidney donation in modern practice. Complication rates of both MINI and LDN procedures are limited and not different between procedures. In specific circumstances, the MINI procedure can still be considered a safe and feasible alternative for living kidney donation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is the most commonly used method for kidney removal in kidney transplantation and, various incisions are used for kidney extraction. In this study, we aimed to compare the results of LDN operations using iliac fossa incision and Pfannenstiel incision.Material and Method: LDN cases performed in our institute between June 2016 and February 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with previous abdominal surgery, bleeding coagulation disorders, ectopic kidneys and patients who were converted to perioperative open surgery were excluded. Demographic data of the patients, operation times, warm ischemia times, complications were recorded and the patients were divided into two groups according to incision types.Results: After the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 203 patients were included in the study. Iliac fossa incision was used in 65% of the patients and the Pfannenstiel incision was used in in 35% of the patients to remove the donor's kidney. There was no difference in age, body mass index, gender, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores between the two groups. Operation time and warm ischemia time were significantly longer in the Pfannenstiel group (p=0.001 and p=0.016 respectively). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of bleeding amount, length of hospital stay, need for narcotic analgesic, visual analog scale scores and postoperative complications.Conclusion: Both types of incisions can be used successfully and safely for the extraction of the kidney in LDN. Although WIT and operation time has been observed to be longer when a Pfannenstiel incision is made, complications and analgesic use are not different between Pfannenstiel incisions and iliac fossa incisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objective of this study is to report the difference in loss of length of the renal artery and vein between an open and laparoscopic renal donor nephrectomy. Methodology: We take 50 open and 50 laparoscopic renal donors for comparison of loss of length of the renal artery and vein. This is a single-blinded study. All patients considered for left donor nephrectomy with a single renal artery and vein are included in the study. Patients considered for right donor nephrectomy, abnormal renal artery and vein anatomy, atherosclerotic renal artery or vein are excluded from the study. Results: In our study, we take 50 open renal donor nephrectomies and 50 laparoscopic renal donor nephrectomies from a total of 115 renal donor nephrectomies from December 2020 to April 2021. For removing bias, we take only the left side nephrectomy which has a single artery and vein. We used study randomizer software which uses cluster randomization which decides case should be operated on either open or laparoscopy. Conclusions: In our study, the difference between preoperative and intraoperative artery length for open donor nephrectomy (ODN) was 0.3 cm, and vein length was 2.3 cm and the difference between preoperative and intraoperative artery length for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) was 0.5 cm, and vein length was 2.5 cm. The difference between renal artery length in open versus LDN is 0.2 cm, and the difference between renal vein length in ODN versus LDN is 0.2 cm, which is statistically insignificant.

Context: Optimum main renal artery (RA) length before first branching needed to achieve single lumen during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is not known. Aims: The aim of the study is to identify optimal minimum length of RA before first branching which can be safely harvested as a single lumen in LDN. Settings and Design: This is a single institutional, retrospective study. Materials and Methods: Records of consecutive left LDNs performed at our institute from January 2016 to June 2019 were reviewed. RA length was measured from preoperative computed tomography angiogram. We clipped RA using two Hem-o-lok® and one titanium clip while maintaining constant mild upward traction. Primary outcome was to identify lowest RA length at which chances of achieving a single lumen were maximum. Secondary outcomes included minimum RA length below which single lumen could not be achieved and incidence of intraoperative vascular complications. Statistical Analyses: Receiver operator characteristic curve was plotted according to donor RA length. Likelihood ratio positive (LR+) was used to identify optimum length of RA above which chances of achieving single lumen were maximum. Results: Four hundred and eighty-eight donors with single RA underwent left LDN during study period. LR +of achieving single lumen after clipping was maximum at 10mm cutoff. Single lumen could not be achieved below 6–7 mm cutoff. There were no vascular complications or re-explorations. Conclusions: Main left RA length ≥10 mm before first branching is most likely to yield single lumen for implantation with our technique.

Background: Kidney transplantation is the definitive treatment for end stage renal disease (ESRD), offering improved quality of life and survival benefit over remaining on dialysis. There is, however, a prevailing significant mismatch between patients awaiting transplantation and available donor kidneys. Over time, initial stringent donor criteria have broadened and organs from extended criteria donors (ECDs) and older donors are now being accepted for transplantation. The spectrum of living donors has also undergone a change from close family members to an increasingly non-related, non-directed altruistic donors, newly classified as 'unspecified' donors. Unspecified elderly donors could be a potential untapped resource to expanding the kidney donor pool globally.Case Presentation: We present a case of an 85 year and 8 months old individual, who donated to an unrelated non-directed matched recipient in the national deceased donor transplant waiting list with excellent donor and recipient outcomes at 7 years.Conclusion: To our knowledge she is one of the oldest reported unspecified living kidney donors in the world to date. This case illustrates that elderly donors in good health can come forward to donate, knowing that it is safe and valuable. Once the immediate perioperative challenges after kidney donation are managed, elderly donors rarely encounter long term sequelae. We therefore report this case to increase awareness and refocus attention of transplant teams on elderly donors as a potential untapped group to help address the organ shortage problem in renal transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objective of this study is to report the difference in loss of length of the renal artery and vein between an open and laparoscopic renal donor nephrectomy. Methodology: We take 50 open and 50 laparoscopic renal donors for comparison of loss of length of the renal artery and vein. This is a single-blinded study. All patients considered for left donor nephrectomy with a single renal artery and vein are included in the study. Patients considered for right donor nephrectomy, abnormal renal artery and vein anatomy, atherosclerotic renal artery or vein are excluded from the study. Results: In our study, we take 50 open renal donor nephrectomies and 50 laparoscopic renal donor nephrectomies from a total of 115 renal donor nephrectomies from December 2020 to April 2021. For removing bias, we take only the left side nephrectomy which has a single artery and vein. We used study randomizer software which uses cluster randomization which decides case should be operated on either open or laparoscopy. Conclusions: In our study, the difference between preoperative and intraoperative artery length for open donor nephrectomy (ODN) was 0.3 cm, and vein length was 2.3 cm and the difference between preoperative and intraoperative artery length for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) was 0.5 cm, and vein length was 2.5 cm. The difference between renal artery length in open versus LDN is 0.2 cm, and the difference between renal vein length in ODN versus LDN is 0.2 cm, which is statistically insignificant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of right- and left-sided live donor nephrectomies using the inverted kidney transplantation technique for right live donor nephrectomy on transplantation. Material and methods: A retrospective review was done for the cases of live donor nephrectomy, either as open donor nephrectomy or laparoscopic donor nephrectomy between 2004 and 2019. Inverted kidney transplantation was used with right-sided grafts. The variables of the right- and left-sided live donor nephrectomies were compared. Results: There were 202 live donor nephrectomies including 71 (35.1%) open donor nephrectomies and 131 (64.9%) laparoscopic donor nephrectomies with 4 cases of conversion to open donor nephrectomy. There were 119 (58.9%) right-sided and 83 (41.1%) left-sided live donor nephrectomies with insignificantly different mean operative time (123 and 127 minutes; P = .09), mean warm ischemia time (82.3 and 84.5 seconds; P = .32), and mean blood loss (73 and 78 mL; P = .18), respectively. Inverted kidney transplantation was performed for 86% of grafts from right live donor nephrectomies. Discharge from hospital was on an average of 4.3 days postoperatively. There were only 3 complications (1 in right live donor nephrectomy and 2 in left live donor nephrectomies) with grade 2 according to Clavien--Dindo Classification. Incidence of delayed graft function (P = .09), transplant vein thrombosis (1 case in each group), 1-year graft survival rate (93.2% vs. 94.8%; P = .12), and 1-year serum creatinine levels (1.4 ± 0.3 vs. 1.3 ± 0.2; P = .09) revealed statistically insignificant differences. Conclusion: Regardless of the surgical technique, the right live donor nephrectomy seems to be technically as safe as the left live donor nephrectomy for both the donors and the recipients. Using inverted kidney transplantation provided convenient extensions of graft's vessels to full length with no significant increased incidence of vascular thrombosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Optimum main renal artery (RA) length before first branching needed to achieve single lumen during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is not known. Aims: The aim of the study is to identify optimal minimum length of RA before first branching which can be safely harvested as a single lumen in LDN. Settings and Design: This is a single institutional, retrospective study. Materials and Methods: Records of consecutive left LDNs performed at our institute from January 2016 to June 2019 were reviewed. RA length was measured from preoperative computed tomography angiogram. We clipped RA using two Hem-o-lok® and one titanium clip while maintaining constant mild upward traction. Primary outcome was to identify lowest RA length at which chances of achieving a single lumen were maximum. Secondary outcomes included minimum RA length below which single lumen could not be achieved and incidence of intraoperative vascular complications. Statistical Analyses: Receiver operator characteristic curve was plotted according to donor RA length. Likelihood ratio positive (LR+) was used to identify optimum length of RA above which chances of achieving single lumen were maximum. Results: Four hundred and eighty-eight donors with single RA underwent left LDN during study period. LR +of achieving single lumen after clipping was maximum at 10mm cutoff. Single lumen could not be achieved below 6--7 mm cutoff. There were no vascular complications or re-explorations. Conclusions: Main left RA length ≥10 mm before first branching is most likely to yield single lumen for implantation with our technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN) offers many advantages compared to open living donor nephrectomy. However, the perceived difficulty in learning LLDN has slowed its wider implementation. Herein, we describe the evolution of LLDN at a single center, emphasizing the approach and technical modifications and its impact on outcome. Methods: The series included a 2½-year period and three different surgeons. We started with two-stage plan for establishing LLDN at the institute (introduction and consolidation). Data of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy performed at the institution were prospectively evaluated regarding donor and recipient outcome. Results: From December 2016 to April 2019, 221 donors underwent LLDN. Three donors required conversion to open surgery. The mean operation time was 96.4 (62–158) min and the mean warm ischemia time was 186 (149–423) s. The complications were observed in 11.6% of donors from LLDN group and all complications were Class I and Class II only (Clavien–Dindo classification). No Class III and Class IV complications occurred. In the present study, there was some learning curve effect observed only in operative time (OT) with longer OT in initial cases. However, the overall operative complications were minimal, showing that this learning curve had no deleterious effects on donor safety. Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that with proper planning, team approach, and a few technical modifications, the transition from open to LLDN could be safe and effective.

Postoperative chylous ascites is a well-known complication of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular malignancies. This complication is now being reported increasingly with laparoscopic nephrectomies as well. A 33-year-old woman with no comorbidities underwent laparoscopic left donor nephrectomy. She had an uneventful postoperative recovery and was discharged on the 5th postoperative day. She reported on the 11th postoperative day with abdominal distension. Clinical examination revealed free fluid in the peritoneal cavity, and she was evaluated further. Imaging revealed mild ascites, which was aspirated, yielding milky fluid. Biochemical analysis of the fluid revealed triglycerides and chylomicrons, consistent with chyle. She was admitted, and an intra-abdominal drain placed under ultrasound guidance. Subsequently, she underwent lymphangiography and embolization. Her drain output came down, and she remained asymptomatic following drain removal. There was no further chylous leak on subsequent follow-up. Chylous ascites following laparoscopic nephrectomy is more common on the left side. Chylous leaks have been attributed to incomplete sealing of lymphatics with energy devices. Precise surgical technique of division of lymphatics between clips can prevent this complication. Most small leaks settle with a conservative care. Those that do not settle require open ligation. Percutaneous lymphatic embolization is an effective minimally invasive modality in managing such patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the long-term graft outcomes of left-versus-right donor nephrectomy with multiple renal arteries (MRAs), 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 1,009 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 postoperative year 5 for single renal artery (SRA) transplants was 89.6%, 89.5% for left-sided MRAs, 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 SRA ones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background This study analyzed remnant kidney function recovery in living donors after laparoscopic nephrectomy to establish a risk stratification model for delayed recovery and further investigated clinically modifiable factors. Patients and methods This retrospective study included 366 adult living donors who underwent elective donation surgery between January 2017 and November 2019 at our hospital. ITMB was included as an analgesic component in the living donor strategy for early postoperative pain relief from November 2018 to November 2019 (n = 116). Kidney function was quantified based on the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and delayed functional recovery of remnant kidney was defined as eGFR

Background: Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery is performed during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) to reduce donor invasiveness. However, the procedure is difficult and does not improve cosmesis when the incision is made at the umbilicus. Therefore, we proposed a minimally invasive LDN with a Pfannenstiel incision using size-reduced trocars (mLDN) to achieve cosmesis and operability and aimed to assess its efficacy and safety., Methods: A total of 27 patients who underwent mLDN were recruited. Data on estimated blood loss, operative time, pneumoperitoneum time, warm ischemic time (WIT), complication rate, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) used, and recipient serum creatinine levels were collected retrospectively. In mLDN, the Pfannenstiel position was incised to approximately 6 cm to retrieve the kidney, and three size-reduced trocars were placed in the left upper abdomen (2.5 mm and 5 mm) and umbilicus (5 mm)., Results: The median operation time and pneumoperitoneum time were 245 and 194 minutes, respectively. The median WIT was 276 seconds, and the serum creatinine levels of the recipients at seven days and one, three, six, and 12 months were significantly improved compared with baseline. No intra- and postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2) were observed, and no patients used additional NSAIDs after the operation. The scarring in the mLDN group was unnoticeable postoperatively., Conclusions: mLDN can be performed safely, with high cosmesis, and with operability similar to that of conventional LDN. Although the WIT tended to be long, the function of the harvested kidney was maintained, and the use of analgesic NSAIDs was lower in this procedure. Our procedure should be considered as an option for LDN., Competing Interests: Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Ichikawa General Hospital Scientific Council and ethics committee issued approval I 22-18. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2024, Hagiuda et al.)

Background: A limited number of publications are available in the literature regarding laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with vaginal extraction (LLDN-VE) for kidney transplantation. The aim of this study was to compare long-term recipient outcomes of standard laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (S-LLDN) and LLDN-VE. Methods: A total of 652 patients [119 LLDN-VE (18.3%) and 533 S-LLDN (81.7%)] were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. The data related to donor and recipient demographics, surgical and anatomical characteristics, and recipient and graft status were retrieved and compared using nonparametric statistical methods. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were applied to compute survival according to the surgical technique. Results: The mean follow-up duration was 73.0 ± 25.4 months for S-LLDN and 69.8 ± 20.4 months for LLDN-VE recipients. The main determinants of long-term outcomes were the serum creatinine (SCr) levels, death-censored graft survival, and recipient survival at the end of the post-op 5th year. LLDN-VE recipients' discharge SCr was found to be statistically lower (P = .049) than S-LLDN patients. Graft survival rates censored for death were 93.8% for the S-LLDN and 93.3% for the LLDN-VE recipients. Cox regression analysis showed significance for younger donor age (P = .010) with the application of 17 parameters, indicating better graft survival outcomes for kidney recipients with younger donors. Conclusions: Compared with the standard method, the long-term results of LLDN-VE are in accordance with or could even be more advantageous than S-LLDN in certain aspects. LLDN-VE appears to be a feasible, safe, and cosmetically superior approach with no negative postoperative sexual or morbid effects on the donor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN) offers many advantages compared to open living donor nephrectomy. However, the perceived difficulty in learning LLDN has slowed its wider implementation. Herein, we describe the evolution of LLDN at a single center, emphasizing the approach and technical modifications and its impact on outcome. Methods: The series included a 2-year period and three different surgeons. We started with two-stage plan for establishing LLDN at the institute (introduction and consolidation). Data of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy performed at the institution were prospectively evaluated regarding donor and recipient outcome. Results: From December 2016 to April 2019, 221 donors underwent LLDN. Three donors required conversion to open surgery. The mean operation time was 96.4 (62–158) min and the mean warm ischemia time was 186 (149–423) s. The complications were observed in 11.6% of donors from LLDN group and all complications were Class I and Class II only (Clavien–Dindo classification). No Class III and Class IV complications occurred. In the present study, there was some learning curve effect observed only in operative time (OT) with longer OT in initial cases. However, the overall operative complications were minimal, showing that this learning curve had no deleterious effects on donor safety. Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that with proper planning, team approach, and a few technical modifications, the transition from open to LLDN could be safe and effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RLDN) is no longer regarded inferior to left LDN (LLDN). However, this knowledge is based on many studies suffering from inherent learning curves, center-specific imbalances, and different laparoscopic techniques. Methods: Pure LDNs at a high-volume referral center from 2011 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Patient, graft characteristics, outcomes of LDNs, and corresponding open kidney transplantations were compared between LLDN and RLDN including a follow-up. Results: 160 (78.4%) LLDNs and 44 (21.6%) RLDNs only differed regarding graft characteristics, as more right grafts had multiple veins (34.1 vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001) and worse scintigraphic function (44 vs. 51%, p < 0.001). RLDNs were shorter (201 vs. 220 min, p = 0.032) with longer warm ischemia time (165 vs. 140 s, p < 0.001), but left grafts were transplanted faster (160 vs. 171 min, p = 0.048). Recipients of right kidneys had more postoperative complications (grade 3: 25.6 vs. 11.3%, p = 0.020). At a follow-up of 45 (range 6–79) months, neither the kidney function, nor death-censored graft (5-year: LLDN 89 vs. 92%, p = 0.969) and patient survival (5-year: LLDN 95 vs. 98%, p = 0.747) differed. Conclusions: Pure LLDN and RLDN can have different outcomes at high-volume centers, especially higher complications for recipients of right grafts. However, long-term function and graft survival are the same irrespective of the chosen side. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Renal artery aneurysm is a rare entity with an incidence of about 1%. The preoperative evaluation of a voluntary kidney donor incidentally revealed a saccular aneurysm of the right renal artery on a computed tomography angiogram. Laparoscopic right donor nephrectomy was performed with Bench repair of the aneurysm and transplantation of this kidney to the recipient in the right iliac fossa. Transplant kidney had good perfusion on revascularization with normal postoperative graft function. Transplanting kidneys with renal artery aneurysm can be safely performed with a win-win situation for both donor and recipient.

Background: Renal transplantation is the ideal treatment method for end-stage renal disease. Since deceased organ donation rates cannot meet the demand, live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is commonly performed worldwide. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is currently the most commonly preferred minimally invasive donor nephrectomy technique. However, experienced surgeons should perform this procedure since the safety of the live donor is the priority in transplant practice. In this study, we aimed to investigate this procedure's safety at the hands of a surgeon during the transition period from open donor nephrectomy (ODN) to LDN. Methods: Data of the donors and recipients who underwent LDN and LDKT in Ankara Medicana Hospital between 2016 and 2019 were included in this study. Demographic, surgical, and immunological data of the donors and recipients were collected retrospectively. Donor data, including duration of surgery, warm ischemia time (WIT), complication rates, duration of hospital stay, and recipient data such as patient and graft survival rates, were compared with the published literature. Results: Two hundred donors and 200 recipients were included. The complication rate, surgical time, WIT at the donor site, and 1- and 3-year patient and graft survival rates were all comparable with the literature. Survival rates were irrespective of the relationship status of the donors with recipients. Conclusions: The LDN procedure can be safely performed by a surgeon with extensive laparoscopic surgery experience in general surgery cases and ODN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Yeni Üroloji Dergisi is the property of Ali Ihsan Tasci and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: Laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (LLDN) is the gold-standard procedure for kidney procurement. Ipsilateral orchialgia has barely been described. Some authors reported that ligation of gonadal vein (GV) above iliac vessel bifurcation could prevent orchialgia. We aimed to assess incidence and duration of orchialgia after LLDN in male donors despite distal ligation of GV. Methods: Patients who underwent LLDN from 2014 to 2017 were included. Standard procedure consisted in distal ligation of GV, close to the renal vein confluence and proximal ureteral ligation. Patients' demographics, per-operative data, and post-operative consultation reports were retrospectively reviewed. Orchialgia and scrotal symptoms were assessed through a non-validated questionnaire by phone interview. Results: Sixty-nine donors were included. Orchialgia incidence and testicular swelling were 31.9% (n = 22) and 15.9% (n = 11), respectively. Median symptom duration was 15.5 months. Orchialgia led to medical consultation in 41.7% (n = 10) of cases. All patients declared having been informed, prior to donation, about possible residual pain but not specifically orchialgia. Conclusion: Orchialgia after LLDN affects more than 30% of donors, despite distal ligation of GV and led less than 50% of them to medical consultation, suggesting a large underestimation in clinical practice. Emphasis should be put on this complication during pre-donation information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The use of laparoscopy is increasing in various surgical disciplines, including living donor kidney transplant (LDKT). In laparoscopic transplants, vessel length of the donor kidneys often falls short. This makes anastomosis to the recipient's external iliac vein difficult, which may cause problems when blood circulation reconstruction is required. Renal vein elongation (RVE) is often needed, but the available materials may fall short in terms of post-transplant vessel function. Objective and methods: We aimed to determine whether the gonadal vein was a viable option for RVE in LDKT. We therefore performed LDKT in three cases wherein RVE was performed using the gonadal vein. We used the cylindrical method wherein the donor's gonadal vein was shaped into a cylinder, and the vessel was extended end-to-end with the renal vein. Results: All cases showed immediate graft function after surgery. The total ischemic time was 151, 168, and 169 min in cases 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The serum creatinine levels at discharge were 0.98 mg/dL, 2.07 mg/dL, and 1.16 mg/dL in cases 1, 2, and 3, respectively. None of the patients developed any complications during their hospital stay. Conclusion: Since the renal vein was extended using a gonadal vein, vessel suturing with the external iliac vein became easier; as a result, bleeding and outflow block could be prevented.

Introduction: In living donor transplantation choosing the right donor and donor side for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is a challenging task in clinical practice. Knowledge about anomalies in renal blood supply are crucial to evaluate the feasibility of the operative procedure. Few data so far exist whether the existence of a retroaortic left renal vein has an impact on living kidney transplantation outcome for donor and recipient. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 221 patients who underwent laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy between 2011 and 2017 for existence of a retroaortic left renal vein. Clinical characteristics and operative outcomes for donors and recipients were analyzed. Results: 221 patients underwent donor nephrectomy between 2011 and 2017; 11 patients (4.98%) showed the feature of a retroaortic left renal vein, and in 8 patients (72.7%) out of those 11 the left kidney was chosen for transplantation. Mean preoperative serum creatinine was 0.77 (0.49–0.98) mg/dL and 1.28 (0.97–1.64) mg/dL at discharge. In recipients mean serum creatinine preoperatively, after 1 week, 1 month,1 year, 2 and 3 years of follow-up was 10.36 (6.09–20.77) mg/dL, 1.71 (0.67–2.72), 1.33 (0.70–1.89), 1.31 (0.95–2.13), 1.31 (0.98–2.13) and 1.33 (1.03–1.84), respectively. Neither donors nor recipients suffered from any operative complications. Conclusions: Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy of a left kidney with retroaortic renal vein is safe for the donor, without limitation in the outcome for the recipient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study analyzed remnant kidney function recovery in living donors after laparoscopic nephrectomy to establish a risk stratification model for delayed recovery and further investigated clinically modifiable factors. Patients and methods: This retrospective study included 366 adult living donors who underwent elective donation surgery between January 2017 and November 2019 at our hospital. ITMB was included as an analgesic component in the living donor strategy for early postoperative pain relief from November 2018 to November 2019 (n = 116). Kidney function was quantified based on the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and delayed functional recovery of remnant kidney was defined as eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 on postoperative day (POD) 1 (n = 240). Results: Multivariable analyses revealed that lower risk for development of eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 on POD 1 was associated with ITMB, female sex, younger age, and higher amount of hourly fluid infusion (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.783; 95% confidence interval = 0.734–0.832; p < 0.001). Propensity score (PS)-matching analyses showed that prevalence rates of eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 on PODs 1 and 7 were higher in the non-ITMB group than in the ITMB group. ITMB adjusted for PS was significantly associated with lower risk for development of eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 on POD 1 in PS-matched living donors. No living donors exhibited severe remnant kidney dysfunction and/or required renal replacement therapy at POD 7. Conclusions: We found an association between the analgesic impact of ITMB and better functional recovery of remnant kidney in living kidney donors. In addition, we propose a stratification model that predicts delayed functional recovery of remnant kidney in living donors: male sex, older age, non-ITMB, and lower hourly fluid infusion rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Initiation of an advanced laparoscopic surgery program requires skill and proper training. Despite description of multiple surgical training modules, an ideal method for training of surgeons for advanced laparoscopic procedures is lacking. We propose an abbreviated self-imposed proctored preceptorship training model as the optimum training method for training skilled laparoscopic surgeons in advanced laparoscopic procedures like laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The laparoscopic donor nephrectomy program was started at the Institute using preceptorship-proctorship model. One hundred left laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed over the course of 2 years. Outcomes in terms of performance related (Surgeon) outcomes in the form of learning curve and patient outcomes in terms of donor outcomes and recipient results and were studied. Learning curve was calculated using the moving average method and calculation of mean operative time of every five consecutive cases. Mean operative time for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy was 108.1 ± 26.5 min, the warm ischemia time averaged at 3.5 ± 1.3 min and the mean blood loss was 130.1 ± 54.9 ml. Moving average analysis revealed that approximately 20 LDN cases were needed to complete the learning phase. According to the mean operative time of every five consecutive cases, learning phase of LDN was completed between 26 and 30 cases. We believe that the abbreviated self-imposed proctored preceptorship model of training is an optimum model for starting a new advanced laparoscopic surgery program and can help surgeons to overcome the initial learning curve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is the gold standard for kidney retrieval in live donors. Until recently, donor nephrectomies were performed only by open technique in Nepal. There is no information on the experience and outcomes of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in Nepal. The study was done to compare the outcomes among donors undergoing open and laparoscopic nephrectomies, and to compare the graft related outcomes between the two groups receiving these kidneys. Methods In this retrospective study, 44 kidney donors from March 2019 to October 2019 were analyzed. Donors were divided into 2 groups: open donor nephrectomy (ODN) and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Parameters for analysis included demographic data, warm ischemia time, surgery time and length of hospital stay. Data on early graft function and complications in recipients till 30th post-operative day were compared. Results There were 22 donors each in the ODN and LDN groups. Baseline characteristics of the donors were comparable between two groups. Mean surgery duration (183.55±43.31 minutes vs 117.73±18.75 minutes) and first warm ischemia time (11.22±4.34 minutes vs 2.3±0.8 minutes) was significantly high in LDN. Hemoglobin drop, post-operative complications in donors, creatinine of donors at discharge, mean hospital stay, graft function at one month and complications in recipients were comparable among ODN and LDN. Pain score in 1st post-operative day was comparable between two groups, however, pain was significantly less in second post-operative day in LDN. Conclusion Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is feasible in Nepal and associated with acceptable morbidity and graft function when compared to ODN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To access the current status of the security and feasibility of right kidney (RK) and multiple-renal artery (MRA) laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN) which are more challenging compared to left kidney (LK) and single renal artery (SRA) because of a shorter renal vein and more complex vascular anatomy. Methods: We did a systematic review of the literature according to the PRISMA recommendations, reporting RK or MRA donor nephrectomy performed with a laparoscopic technique compared to LK or SRA kidney LLDN. The identified and analyzed primary outcomes of interest were operating time (OT), warm ischemia time (WIT), rate of conversion and transfusion, donor length of stay (LOS), delayed graft function (DGF) and rate of graft loss (GL). Results: 16 comparative studies (1397 cases) of RK-LLDN and 12 comparative studies including 15 series (993 cases) of MRA-LLDN were selected. For RK-LLDN review, conversion rate was 0.8% and blood transfusion rate 0.2%, only one case of graft venous thrombosis was reported, OT was shorter in four studies and there was no any difference of DGF and GL rate compared to LK-LLDN. For MRA-LLDN review, conversion rate was 1.3% and blood transfusion rate 1.1%, OT and WIT were longer compared to SRA-LLDN, there were more ureteral complications in two studies, and no difference in terms of vascular complications and graft loss rate. Conclusion: RK-LLDN and MRA-LLDN would be similar to LK-LLDN and SRA-LLDN in terms of feasibility and safety for the donor as well as graft function results for RK-LLDN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Online Turkish Journal of Health Sciences (OTJHS) / Online Türk Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi is the property of Oguz KARABAY and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Chylous ascites refers to the accumulation of chyle in the abdominal cavity. Postoperative chylous ascites is most commonly associated with abdominal aortic surgeries. However, it is a rare complication following laparoscopic nephrectomy. It causes loss of fat, protein, and antibodies causing malnutrition and immunodeficiency. Thus, it is important to treat it as early as possible. We hereby report a case of chylous ascites following laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. A 55-year-old female was admitted at our center 2 weeks after undergoing left laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with abdominal distension and constipation. USG abdomen revealed free fluid in the abdomen. Paracentesis revealed chylous ascites. The patient was started on conservative treatment, including a diet rich in proteins and low in fats; conservative treatment, however, was unsuccessful. Lymphangiography and subsequent embolization of the defect were done, and she made a full recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Variations in the renal vasculature always deserve a special attention owing to its higher prevalence and wider range. A thorough knowledge of the normal morphology and the variations in the origin, course, branches and distribution of the renal vasculature are essential for the successful outcome of the surgical interventions in this region without dreadful complications. During routine dissection for the undergraduate medical students following the standard procedures, dissection of the retroperitoneal region in a male cadaver, revealed bilateral variations in the number, origin, course and branches of the renal arteries.The renal arteries with its branches were dissected out meticulously and the variations encountered were documented. Bilateral supernumerary renal arteries with extra-hilar and pre-hilar branches were observed. In addition, it was found that the supernumerary inferior pre- caval right renal artery had a variant course in relation to ureter before entering the hilum of the right kidney. The variant renal arteries documented in the present study with their embryological correlation is clinically important in the urological management, especially during the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, where the field of vision is limited and also in the endovascular renal artery denervation procedure, which is an useful adjuvant for the patients having drug-resistant primary hypertension.