Comparison of laparoscopic and open donor nephrectomy: UK experience
2004; Wiley; Volume: 95; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.05264.x
ISSN1464-410X
AutoresColin Wilson, Aftab Bhatti, D. Rix, Naeem Soomro,
Tópico(s)Pediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
ResumoA comparison of laparoscopic and open donor nephrectomy is presented by authors from the UK. They found that the laparoscopic approach could safely be offered to patients treated in experienced units and after adequate training fo the surgeon, with no increase in complications or decrease in efficacy. OBJECTIVE To compare our early experience of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) with a contemporary cohort of conventional open donor nephrectomy (ODN). PATIENTS AND METHODS Transperitoneal left‐sided LDN was offered to carefully selected potential live kidney donors on the basis of vascular anatomy. The first 20 donors who underwent LDN were compared with a control group of 20 patients who had ODN. Donors and recipients were compared for demographics, intraoperative variables, postoperative complications and allograft function. RESULTS There was no peri‐operative mortality in either group. No laparoscopic procedure required open conversion. The operating time was comparable (165 vs 153 min); LDN was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss (200 vs 350 mL; Mann‐Whitney U , P = 0.01) and hospital stay (3 vs 5 days; P < 0.001). The graft warm ischaemic time was significantly longer for LDN (5 vs 2 min; P < 0.001) but this did not appear to affect either the delayed graft function rate (5% vs 10%, not significant) or serum creatinine level at discharge (125 vs 126 µmol/L). CONCLUSIONS UK centres with experience of advanced laparoscopy and ODN can safely offer LDN to potential live donors.
Referência(s)