Introduction: The aim of the present study was to compare long-term donor outcomes after open and laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. The focus was on pregnancy rates, hypertension and quality of life parameters. Materials and Methods: Data were retrospectively collected using our institution's electronic database and a structured questionnaire. The study included 30 donors after open donor nephrectomy (ODN) and 131 donors after laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Results: Demographic data did not differ between groups. When asked for their preference, significantly more donors in the LDN group would choose the same surgical approach again. The overall frequency of postoperative complications was significantly lower in the LDN group. The incidence of grade III complications was 2% after LDN and 10% after ODN (p = 0.79). Only 2 out of 15 female donors aged between 18 and 45 years delivered a healthy child after DN. On interview, only 4 out of 15 female donors declared the desire to have children after DN. Conclusions: From the donor perspective, long-term outcomes after LDN are more favorable than after ODN. To ensure favorable functional outcomes, strict preoperative donor selection and diligent long-term donor follow-up are required.

Objective: We conducted this study to determine whether it is justifiable for transplant centers to reject cadaveric donor organs based on marginal organ quality. There is a growing discrepancy between the demand for renal transplants and the number of transplants conducted. For the many patients on the renal transplant waiting list, this translates into increased dialysis-associated morbidity, mortality and a reduced quality of life. Patients and Methods: In our retrospective analysis, we focused on deceased donor kidneys that had been rejected in other transplant centers because of poor organ quality (111 patients) and then accepted for transplantation at our center, compared with a control group consisting of 343 patients. Results: Cold ischemia time was statistically significantly shorter in the control group (11 vs. 12.5 h, p = 0.005). Also, delayed graft function occurred significantly (p = 0.004) more often in the study group (45.9-30.3%). Parameters regarding perioperative data and recipient outcome did not show significant differences and except for 2 time points at 1 week and 3 months, graft function did not differ either. Conclusions: We propose that acceptance criteria for marginal donor kidneys should be expanded. Centers should reconsider their acceptance criteria in the light of these findings as the results of these transplantations may even be much better if the delay due to reallocation and retransport can be spared.

No abstract