Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy

Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients

Charles J. Dolce, Jennifer E. Keller, Kenneth C Walters, Daniel Griffin, H. James Norton, B. Todd Heniford, Kent W. Kercher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Minimally invasive surgical techniques have become the preferred method for live donor nephrectomy (DN) in many centers. We compared our experience with laparoscopic and open DN in a single institution. Methods: Data for 266 consecutive live DNs were collected. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data were compared. Results: A total of 199 hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) DNs, 18 totally laparoscopic (TL), and 49 open DNs were performed. Laparoscopic DN was associated with a shorter operative time (p<0.013), less blood loss (p<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001) than open DN. Warm ischemia time was less for HAL versus TL DN (59.9 vs. 90.0 seconds; p<0.0001). Compared with open DN, laparoscopic patients had fewer complications (p<0.03), fewer wound infections (p<0.004), less wound paresthesias (p<0.0009), and fewer complaints of chronic incisional pain (p<0.0001). Delayed graft function during the first 24 h postoperatively was significantly less for the laparoscopic DN versus the open cases (12.9% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.003), but the need for hemodialysis for the recipient was similar between groups (6.9% vs. 5%; p = not significant). Conclusions: Laparoscopic DN resulted in less blood loss, reduced operative time, and shorter hospital stay than open DN. Hand-assisted laparoscopic DN has the potential to decrease warm ischemia time for renal allografts. Donors managed laparoscopically had fewer complications, significantly less wound-related morbidity, and less delayed graft function than patients who underwent open DN.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1564-1568
Number of pages5
JournalSurgical Endoscopy
Volume23
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Nephrectomy
Tissue Donors
Delayed Graft Function
Warm Ischemia
Hand
Operative Time
Length of Stay
Paresthesia
Wounds and Injuries
Wound Infection
Chronic Pain
Allografts
Renal Dialysis
Demography
Morbidity
Kidney

Keywords

  • Delayed graft function
  • Donor nephrectomy
  • Laparoscopic
  • Outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Dolce, C. J., Keller, J. E., Walters, K. C., Griffin, D., Norton, H. J., Heniford, B. T., & Kercher, K. W. (2009). Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients. Surgical Endoscopy, 23(7), 1564-1568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0340-7

Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy : Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients. / Dolce, Charles J.; Keller, Jennifer E.; Walters, Kenneth C; Griffin, Daniel; Norton, H. James; Heniford, B. Todd; Kercher, Kent W.

In: Surgical Endoscopy, Vol. 23, No. 7, 01.01.2009, p. 1564-1568.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dolce, CJ, Keller, JE, Walters, KC, Griffin, D, Norton, HJ, Heniford, BT & Kercher, KW 2009, 'Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients', Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 23, no. 7, pp. 1564-1568. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0340-7
Dolce, Charles J. ; Keller, Jennifer E. ; Walters, Kenneth C ; Griffin, Daniel ; Norton, H. James ; Heniford, B. Todd ; Kercher, Kent W. / Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy : Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients. In: Surgical Endoscopy. 2009 ; Vol. 23, No. 7. pp. 1564-1568.
@article{1f3621d5bbf64415a353385a387751a5,
title = "Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients",
abstract = "Background: Minimally invasive surgical techniques have become the preferred method for live donor nephrectomy (DN) in many centers. We compared our experience with laparoscopic and open DN in a single institution. Methods: Data for 266 consecutive live DNs were collected. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data were compared. Results: A total of 199 hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) DNs, 18 totally laparoscopic (TL), and 49 open DNs were performed. Laparoscopic DN was associated with a shorter operative time (p<0.013), less blood loss (p<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001) than open DN. Warm ischemia time was less for HAL versus TL DN (59.9 vs. 90.0 seconds; p<0.0001). Compared with open DN, laparoscopic patients had fewer complications (p<0.03), fewer wound infections (p<0.004), less wound paresthesias (p<0.0009), and fewer complaints of chronic incisional pain (p<0.0001). Delayed graft function during the first 24 h postoperatively was significantly less for the laparoscopic DN versus the open cases (12.9{\%} vs. 30.4{\%}; p = 0.003), but the need for hemodialysis for the recipient was similar between groups (6.9{\%} vs. 5{\%}; p = not significant). Conclusions: Laparoscopic DN resulted in less blood loss, reduced operative time, and shorter hospital stay than open DN. Hand-assisted laparoscopic DN has the potential to decrease warm ischemia time for renal allografts. Donors managed laparoscopically had fewer complications, significantly less wound-related morbidity, and less delayed graft function than patients who underwent open DN.",
keywords = "Delayed graft function, Donor nephrectomy, Laparoscopic, Outcomes",
author = "Dolce, {Charles J.} and Keller, {Jennifer E.} and Walters, {Kenneth C} and Daniel Griffin and Norton, {H. James} and Heniford, {B. Todd} and Kercher, {Kent W.}",
year = "2009",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-009-0340-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "1564--1568",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy

T2 - Outcomes analysis of 266 consecutive patients

AU - Dolce, Charles J.

AU - Keller, Jennifer E.

AU - Walters, Kenneth C

AU - Griffin, Daniel

AU - Norton, H. James

AU - Heniford, B. Todd

AU - Kercher, Kent W.

PY - 2009/1/1

Y1 - 2009/1/1

N2 - Background: Minimally invasive surgical techniques have become the preferred method for live donor nephrectomy (DN) in many centers. We compared our experience with laparoscopic and open DN in a single institution. Methods: Data for 266 consecutive live DNs were collected. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data were compared. Results: A total of 199 hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) DNs, 18 totally laparoscopic (TL), and 49 open DNs were performed. Laparoscopic DN was associated with a shorter operative time (p<0.013), less blood loss (p<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001) than open DN. Warm ischemia time was less for HAL versus TL DN (59.9 vs. 90.0 seconds; p<0.0001). Compared with open DN, laparoscopic patients had fewer complications (p<0.03), fewer wound infections (p<0.004), less wound paresthesias (p<0.0009), and fewer complaints of chronic incisional pain (p<0.0001). Delayed graft function during the first 24 h postoperatively was significantly less for the laparoscopic DN versus the open cases (12.9% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.003), but the need for hemodialysis for the recipient was similar between groups (6.9% vs. 5%; p = not significant). Conclusions: Laparoscopic DN resulted in less blood loss, reduced operative time, and shorter hospital stay than open DN. Hand-assisted laparoscopic DN has the potential to decrease warm ischemia time for renal allografts. Donors managed laparoscopically had fewer complications, significantly less wound-related morbidity, and less delayed graft function than patients who underwent open DN.

AB - Background: Minimally invasive surgical techniques have become the preferred method for live donor nephrectomy (DN) in many centers. We compared our experience with laparoscopic and open DN in a single institution. Methods: Data for 266 consecutive live DNs were collected. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data were compared. Results: A total of 199 hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) DNs, 18 totally laparoscopic (TL), and 49 open DNs were performed. Laparoscopic DN was associated with a shorter operative time (p<0.013), less blood loss (p<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (p<0.0001) than open DN. Warm ischemia time was less for HAL versus TL DN (59.9 vs. 90.0 seconds; p<0.0001). Compared with open DN, laparoscopic patients had fewer complications (p<0.03), fewer wound infections (p<0.004), less wound paresthesias (p<0.0009), and fewer complaints of chronic incisional pain (p<0.0001). Delayed graft function during the first 24 h postoperatively was significantly less for the laparoscopic DN versus the open cases (12.9% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.003), but the need for hemodialysis for the recipient was similar between groups (6.9% vs. 5%; p = not significant). Conclusions: Laparoscopic DN resulted in less blood loss, reduced operative time, and shorter hospital stay than open DN. Hand-assisted laparoscopic DN has the potential to decrease warm ischemia time for renal allografts. Donors managed laparoscopically had fewer complications, significantly less wound-related morbidity, and less delayed graft function than patients who underwent open DN.

KW - Delayed graft function

KW - Donor nephrectomy

KW - Laparoscopic

KW - Outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349784655&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349784655&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-009-0340-7

DO - 10.1007/s00464-009-0340-7

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 1564

EP - 1568

JO - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

JF - Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 7

ER -