Skip Navigation



NDT Advance Access published online on October 4, 2005
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, doi:10.1093/ndt/gfi150
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
21/2/472    most recent
gfi150v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Renoult, E.
Right arrow Articles by Kessler, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Renoult, E.
Right arrow Articles by Kessler, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2005]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Received March 12, 2005
Accepted August 26, 2005

Original Articles

Robot-assisted laparoscopic and open live-donor nephrectomy: a comparison of donor morbidity and early renal allograft outcomes

Edith Renoult 1*, Jacques Hubert 2, Marc Ladrière 1, Nicolas Billaut 2, Eric Mourey 2, Benoît Feuillu 2, and Michèle Kessler 1

1 Department of Nephrology, University Hospital of Nancy, France
2 Department of Urology, University Hospital of Nancy, France

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Edith Renoult, E-mail: erenoult{at}msn.com



  Abstract

Background. Robot-assisted laparoscopic donor (RALD) nephrectomy, a new procedure for the removal of a kidney from a living donor, was performed on 13 subjects at our centre.

Methods. The immediate post-operative courses for these donors, and their respective recipients, were compared with those of 13 previous open live-donor nephrectomies (OPEN), performed in our facility.

Results. We found no significant differences between these two donor groups with respect to age, gender, body mass index or renal vasculature. The average operative times and the warm ischaemia times were greater in the RALD group, 185.5'' vs 113.4'' (P = 0.0001) and 7'15'' vs 1'41'' (P = 0.0001), respectively. There was no conversion to the open procedure in the RALD group. The estimated blood loss was slight in both groups. Following nephrectomy, deep venous thrombosis occurred in one RALD patient and acute pyelonephritis in one OPEN patient. The average duration of hospitalization was shorter after the RALD procedure (5.84±1.8 days vs 9.69±2.2 days, P = 0.0001). The estimated creatinine clearance rate (eClcreat) was equivalent for all donors, at 5 days and 1 month after nephrectomy. All kidneys started functioning immediately after the transplantation. The mean recipient eClcreat (ml/min) was 58.16±26.7 for OPEN group kidneys and 62.23±17.59 for RALD group kidneys (P = 0.65), 5 days after transplantation.

Conclusions. RALD nephrectomies were associated with very low morbidity among donors, in which both the operative and warm ischaemia times were of longer duration, but had no observable adverse effects upon short-term graft function.

Keywords: kidney graft function; live donor; minimally invasive surgical techniques; robot-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy; robotics.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.