Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: technique and outcome, a single-center experience

Zaytoun, Osama; Elsawy, Moustafa; Ateba, Kareem Mahmoud Fathi; Khalifa, A. M.; Hamdy, Ahmed; Mostafa, Asmaa

doi:10.1186/s12301-021-00254-7

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fortunately, all cases resolved spontaneously in less than seven days. While there is no definitive explanation for the prolonged ileus in the right LLDN group, it has been noted in other right LLDN series that ileus and reduced bowel function may be observed [ 15 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic Right Donor Nephrectomy: A Two-Center Comparative Study

Ahmadi,

Al Rashed,

Hasan

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAs the field of laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN) has progressed over the years, there has been a growing emphasis on optimizing surgical techniques and outcomes to ensure the safety and well-being of living kidney donors. The early experiences with right LLDN, marked by challenges and concerns such as high conversion rates to open surgery and early graft loss due to technical reasons, prompted a reevaluation of the approach toward right-sided donor nephrectomies.In this article, we aim to compare the safety and efficacy of right LLDN to left LLDN performed in our centers and to provide valuable insights that can ultimately enhance patient outcomes and ensure the wellbeing of living organ donors. MethodsBetween January 2018 and January 2022, we conducted 16 cases of right LLDN and compared them with 134 cases of left LLDN procedures done in the Kingdom of Bahrain and Jordan over the same time period. We analyzed differences in donor age, sex, operative time, warm ischemia time (WIT), graft function, complications, and conversion to open technique. Patient data and surgical outcomes were extracted from medical records and surgical databases.Statistical analysis was conducted to identify significant differences between the two groups. Categorical variables such as complications and safety outcomes were compared using chi-square tests and logistic regression analysis. The primary outcomes of interest included safety metrics such as complication rates, vascular complications, graft loss, and postoperative serum creatinine levels for the recipients. ResultsOur study showed similar demographics in both groups. However, the operative time was shorter for the left LLDN, with 81 minutes compared to 96 minutes for the right. Warm ischemia times (WITs) were comparable at 4.5 minutes for the left and 5.2 minutes for the right. There was less incidence of delayed graft function on the left side (none in the left group compared to one case in the right group). Both groups had similar sixmonth graft function in terms of serum creatinine levels (0.98 mg/dL for the left and 1.2 mg/dL for the right), hospital stays (2.5 days for the left and 2.8 days for the right), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (90 mL for the left and 50 mL for the right). Additionally, no blood transfusions were required in either group, but there was one case of conversion to open surgery in the right LLDN group. ConclusionOur data confirm the safety and efficacy of the right LLDN, consistent with the current literature. This increases the cumulative evidence supporting the use of laparoscopic retrieval on the right side when indicated.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%