Mini-laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy with the Use of 3-mm Instruments and Laparoscope

Overview

Journal World J Urol

Specialty Urology

Date 2014 Sep 4

PMID 25182807

Citations 2

Authors

Alberto Breda

Ivan Schwartzmann

Esteban Emiliani

Oscar Rodriguez-Faba

Lluis Gausa

Jorge Caffaratti

Xavier Ponce de Leon

Humberto Villavicencio

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze our preliminary outcomes on the use of 3 mm instruments for laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LLDN).

Methods: Our series includes thirteen patients, who underwent LLDN using 3-mm instruments and laparoscope and 5-mm transumbilical trocar. The patients were followed at 7 and 14 days from discharge and were specifically asked about their cosmetic satisfaction. At follow-up, the recipient graft function was controlled, as well as the donor's cosmetic results. Eight months after surgery, all thirteen patients were asked to fill out the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire and Scoring System (PSAQ).

Results: All patients presented good recovery after surgery. Regarding cosmetic outcomes, the donors expressed their satisfaction toward the minimal incision size and optimal esthetic results at 7 and 14 days from discharge home. The low scores on each section of the PSAQ confirmed the favorable outcomes. Early graft function was satisfactory at 1 and 3 months after the kidney transplantation. Furthermore, there were no major complications in the recipients.

Conclusions: Our persistent positive results with the use of 3-mm instruments during LLDN support this technique as a good alternative to the standard laparoscopic approach for minimizing the incision site, while maintaining safety and excellent clinical outcomes. The fact that the general laparoscopic standards are maintained could make this approach a very attractive alternative to the other minimally invasive approaches for live donor nephrectomy. The hope is in that the higher degree of satisfaction in the donor population demonstrated in this study may likely enhance living kidney donation.

Citing Articles

How to dissect the pelvic nerves: from microanatomy to surgical rules. An evidence-based clinical review.

Aleksandrov A, Smith A, Botchorishvili R, Rabischong B Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2022; 14(1):17-29.

PMID: 35373544 PMC: 9612858. DOI: 10.52054/FVVO.14.1.011.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy Techniques and Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience with More than 1000 Cases.

Cho S, Moon H, Kang S, Choi S, Kim K, Choi Y Ann Transplant. 2020; 25:e918189.

PMID: 32041930 PMC: 7034519. DOI: 10.12659/AOT.918189.

References

Carvalho G, Cavazzola L, Rao P . Minilaparoscopic surgery-not just a pretty face! What can be found beyond the esthetics reasons?. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013; 23(8):710-3. DOI: 10.1089/lap.2013.0147. View

Porpiglia F, Autorino R, Cicione A, Pagliarulo V, Falsaperla M, Volpe A . Contemporary urologic minilaparoscopy: indications, techniques, and surgical outcomes in a multi-institutional European cohort. J Endourol. 2014; 28(8):951-7. DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0134. View

Alcaraz A, Musquera M, Peri L, Izquierdo L, Garcia-Cruz E, Huguet J . Feasibility of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living donor nephrectomy: is kidney vaginal delivery the approach of the future?. Eur Urol. 2011; 59(6):1019-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.03.021. View

Fornara P, Doehn C, Seyfarth M, Jocham D . Why is urological laparoscopy minimally invasive?. Eur Urol. 2000; 37(3):241-50. DOI: 10.1159/000052351. View

Hiller J, Sroka M, Holochek M, Morrison A, Kavoussi L, Ratner L . Functional advantages of laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy compared with conventional open-donor nephrectomy. J Transpl Coord. 1998; 7(3):134-40. DOI: 10.7182/prtr.1.7.3.v503420j4hr31621. View

Park Y, Min S, Lee J, Lee H, Jung W, Lee J . Comparison of survival probabilities for living-unrelated versus cadaveric renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc. 2004; 36(7):2020-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.08.122. View

Pini G, Goezen A, Schulze M, Hruza M, Klein J, Rassweiler J . Small-incision access retroperitoneoscopic technique (SMART) pyeloplasty in adult patients: comparison of cosmetic and post-operative pain outcomes in a matched-pair analysis with standard retroperitoneoscopy: preliminary report. World J Urol. 2011; 30(5):605-11. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-011-0740-x. View

Jacobs S, Cho E, Foster C, Liao P, Bartlett S . Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: the University of Maryland 6-year experience. J Urol. 2003; 171(1):47-51. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000100221.20410.4a. View

Greco F, Hoda M, Alcaraz A, Bachmann A, Hakenberg O, Fornara P . Laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: analysis of the existing literature. Eur Urol. 2010; 58(4):498-509. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.04.003. View

10.

Velidedeoglu E, Williams N, Brayman K, Desai N, Campos L, Palanjian M . Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and hand-assisted approaches to live-donor nephrectomy. Transplantation. 2002; 74(2):169-72. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-200207270-00005. View

11.

Ratner L, Kavoussi L, Sroka M, Hiller J, Weber R, Schulam P . Laparoscopic assisted live donor nephrectomy--a comparison with the open approach. Transplantation. 1997; 63(2):229-33. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-199701270-00009. View

12.

Breda A, Villamizar J, Faba O, Caliolo C, de Gracia A, Gausa L . Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy with the use of 3-mm instruments and laparoscope: initial experience at a tertiary center. Eur Urol. 2011; 61(4):840-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.11.038. View

13.

Chan D, Ratner L, Kavoussi L . Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: standard of care or unnecessary risk of organ loss?. Curr Opin Urol. 2000; 9(3):219-22. DOI: 10.1097/00042307-199905000-00005. View

14.

Simforoosh N, Soltani M, Sharifi S, Ahanian A, Lashay A, Arab D . Mini-laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: initial series. Urol J. 2014; 10(4):1054-8. View

15.

Soble J, Gill I . Needlescopic urology: incorporating 2-mm instruments in laparoscopic surgery. Urology. 1998; 52(2):187-94. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00234-9. View

16.

Musquera M, Peri L, Izquierdo L, Campillo P, Ribal M, Alcaraz A . [Pioneer experience in Spain with LSSS nephrectomy in living donor]. Actas Urol Esp. 2011; 35(9):559-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2011.04.007. View

17.

Lam J, Breda A, Schulam P . Is laparoscopic donor nephrectomy the new standard?. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2007; 4(4):186-7. DOI: 10.1038/ncpuro0755. View

18.

Wright A, Will T, Holt D, Turk T, Perry K . Laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: a look at current trends and practice patterns at major transplant centers across the United States. J Urol. 2008; 179(4):1488-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.066. View

19.

Cadeddu J, Ratner L, Kavoussi L . Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Semin Laparosc Surg. 2001; 7(3):195-9. View

20.

Durani P, McGrouther D, Ferguson M . The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire: a reliable and valid patient-reported outcomes measure for linear scars. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009; 123(5):1481-1489. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181a205de. View