Donor nephrectomy: A comparison of techniques and results of open, hand assisted and full laparoscopic nephrectomy.

PURPOSE Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LAP) has been gaining more popularity among kidney donors and transplant surgeons. There have been some concerns about the function of kidney grafts harvested by laparoscopic procedures. We report our results of LAP. MATERIALS AND METHODS Prospective data were collected for our donor nephrectomy operations. A telephone survey was done by an independent investigator on the impact of surgery on quality of life. Graft function was also evaluated by serial serum creatinine and mercaptoacetyltriglycine renal nuclear scans. RESULTS A total of 100 patients were included in the study; of whom 55 underwent open donor nephrectomy (OD), 28 underwent LAP and 17 underwent hand assisted donor nephrectomy (HAL). Mean patient age was 39 +/- 12 years and it was similar in all groups. Mean operative time was 306 +/- 40 minutes for LAP, 294 +/- 42 minutes for HAL and 163 +/- 24 minutes for OD (p = 0.001). Laparoscopic operative time was decreased to 180 +/- 56 minutes for LAP and 155 +/- 40 minutes for HAL in the last 10 patients. Mean estimated blood loss was 200 +/- 107 cc for LAP, 167 +/- 70 cc for HAL and 320 +/- 99 cc for OD (p = 0.0001). Mean warm ischemia time was 3 +/- 2 minutes for LAP, 2 +/- 2 minutes for HAL and 2 +/- 1 minutes for OD (p = 0.002). Postoperative hospitalization was 2 +/- 2 days for LAP and 3 +/- 2 days for OD (p = 0.01). LAP required 30% less narcotic medicine than OD postoperatively (p = 0.04). There were no major complications in LAP cases and no complete or partial graft loss was noted. Mean followup was 7 months. Recipient creatinine was not significantly different for kidneys harvested by LAP or OD (p = 0.5). Diuretic mercaptoacetyltriglycine renograms were performed in all recipients 1 to 3 days after surgery and mean effective renal plasma flow was similar for the 3 groups (p = 0.9). According to telephone survey results 85% of LAP, 71% of HAL and 43% of OD patients reported a return to normal physical activity within 4 weeks after surgery. Similarly 74% of LAP, 62% of HAL and 26% of OD patients were able to return to work within 4 weeks after surgery. CONCLUSIONS Our data show no significant difference in graft function between LAP and OD. LAP and HAL were safe and complications were minimal. The main difference was that patients treated with LAP and HAL returned to normal physical activity and work significantly earlier than those who underwent OD.

[1]  J. Barry Living donor nephrectomy. , 2004, The Journal of urology.

[2]  S. Loening,et al.  Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: from alternative to standard procedure. , 2003, Transplantation proceedings.

[3]  Jim C Hu,et al.  Quality of life, pain and return to normal activities following laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus open mini-incision donor nephrectomy. , 2003, The Journal of urology.

[4]  S. Loening,et al.  Laparoscopic live donor right nephrectomy: a new technique with preservation of vascular length. , 2003, Transplantation proceedings.

[5]  S. Loening,et al.  Laparoscopic live donor right nephrectomy: a new technique with preservation of vascular length. , 2002, The Journal of urology.

[6]  C. Schlachta,et al.  Health-related quality of life after laparoscopic and open nephrectomy , 2002, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[7]  C. Schlachta,et al.  Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy , 2002, Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques.

[8]  D. Slakey,et al.  Open donor, laparoscopic donor and hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison of outcomes. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[9]  I. Gill Hand-assisted laparoscopy: con. , 2001, Urology.

[10]  M. Stifelman,et al.  Hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison with the open approach. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[11]  J. Wolf,et al.  Randomized controlled trial of hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open surgical live donor nephrectomy. , 2001, Transplantation.

[12]  P. Kuo,et al.  Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with a 23-hour stay: a new standard for transplantation surgery. , 2000, Annals of surgery.

[13]  D. Grady The new organ donors are living strangers. , 1999, The New York times on the Web.

[14]  J. Fink,et al.  A comparison of recipient renal outcomes with laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy. , 1999, Transplantation.

[15]  B. Kramer,et al.  Trends and black/white differences in treatment for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. , 1998, Medical care.

[16]  L. Kavoussi,et al.  Comparison of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy versus the standard open approach. , 1997, Transplantation proceedings.

[17]  M. Schapira,et al.  Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer in African‐American Compared with Caucasian Men; Less Use of Aggressive Therapy for Comparable Disease , 1995, Medical care.

[18]  Robert G. Moore,et al.  Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. , 1995, Transplantation.

[19]  F. J. Leary,et al.  Living donor nephrectomy. , 1973, The Journal of urology.