RESUMEN
The retroperitoneoscopic (RP) approach to live donor nephrectomy (LDN) may be advantageous for the donor because it avoids mobilization of peritoneal organs and provides direct access to the renal vessels. Notwithstanding, this approach is not popular, likely because of the steeper learning curve. We feel that hand-assistance (HA) can reduce the learning curve and in this study, we present our experience with a novel hand-assist approach to retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy (HARP-LDN). Over a one-yr period, 10 consecutive patients underwent left HARP-LDN with a mean body mass index of 29 and three with prior left abdomen surgery. The surgical technique utilizes a 7 cm, muscle-sparing incision for the hand-port with two endoscopic ports. Operative time was an average of 155 min., with no open conversions. Mean blood loss was 68 mL, and warm ischemia time was 2.5 min. Hospital stay averaged 2.7 d with postoperative complications limited to one urinary retention. Our modified HARP approach to left LDN is safe, effective and can be performed expeditiously. Our promising initial results require a larger patient cohort to confirm the advantages of the hand-assisted retroperitoneal technique.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscópía Mano-Asistida/métodos , Enfermedades Renales/cirugía , Trasplante de Riñón , Donadores Vivos , Nefrectomía , Espacio Retroperitoneal , Recolección de Tejidos y Órganos/instrumentación , Recolección de Tejidos y Órganos/métodos , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Curva de Aprendizaje , Masculino , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
Kidney transplantation is the therapeutic option of choice for patients with end-stage renal disease. With the advent of safer harvesting techniques and immunosuppression, both donor and recipient outcomes have markedly improved in recent years. Kidney donation from Living donors remains the single most important factor responsible for improving patient and graft survival. The laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has revolutionized renal transplantation, allowing expansion of the donor pool by diminishing surgical morbidity while maintaining equivalent recipient outcome. This technique is now becoming the gold-standard harvesting procedure in transplant centres worldwide, despite its technical challenge and ongoing procedural maturation, especially early in the learning curve. Previous contraindications to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are no longer absolute. In the following analysis, the procedural aspects of the laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are detailed including pre-operative assessment, operative technique and a review of the current literature delineating aspects of both donor and recipient morbidity and mortality compared with open harvesting techniques.
Asunto(s)
Laparoscopía , Donadores Vivos , Nefrectomía/métodos , HumanosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of CT angiography (CTA) in evaluating the renovascular anatomy in 50 patients who underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, and to correlate results with donor morbidity and recipient outcome. METHODS: Forty-eight patients were evaluated by CTA prior to laparoscopy. Donors with aberrant renovasculature and their respective recipients were divided into: 1) accurate preoperative CTA ("predictive group", PG), 2) inaccurate CTA ("non-predictive group", NPG). Warm ischemia times (WIT), estimated blood loss (EBL), operative time (OT), and the open conversion rate were compared. Recipient creatinine values on post-operative day 1 and 3 months were recorded with the rate of delayed graft function (DGF) and ureteral complication. Statistical significance was calculated using the student's T-test. RESULTS: Among patients with aberrant vasculature (48%, 23/48) at laparoscopy, 14 were accurately predicted by CT angiography (11 arterial, 3 venous). NPG consisted of 5 duplicated arteries, 1 early arterial branching, and 3 anomalous veins. CT accuracy was 85%. The sensitivity and specificity of the arterial imaging were 65% and 100% respectively, while those of venous imaging were 50% and 100%. EBL, WIT, OT, number of open conversions, and ureteral complications were statistically insignificant between groups (p= 0.05, 95% C.I.). The mean decreases in creatinine between NPG and PG on post-operative day 1 and at 3 months were 45.4% and 54.8%, and 71.5% and 79.1% respectively, both statistically insignificant. Two of 8 in the NPG experienced DGF as compared to 1/8 in the PG. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lower sensitivity of this study, the discordance between imaging and laparoscopy did not augment donor morbidity or increase adverse recipient outcomes. This may indicate that regardless of the shortcomings of 2-D CTA for living donors, it represents a safe and effective imaging modality when coupled with meticulous laparoscopic dissection and central intraoperative involvement of the transplant surgeon.