Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technical considerations and pitfalls in laparoscopic live donornephrectomy

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recent developments in laparoscopic solid organ surgery suggest a possible reduction in postoperative discomfort and disability for kidney donors. Technical aspects and the influence of surgical experience in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy were evaluated.

Methods

The clinical outcome of 57 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies (LapNx) was compared with that for a historic control group of 27 open donor nephrectomies (OpenNx).

Results

Three conversions to open nephrectomy (5.2%) were necessary. Postoperative complications were minor and comparable in both groups. Patients who under-went laparoscopic surgery demonstrated significantly less postoperative pain and a shorter hospital stay, but operative time and warm ischemia time were significantly longer. Graft survival after LapNx was 100% during a median follow-up period of 13 months. Operative time for LapNx decreased considerably with experience gained and seemed to be less for right nephrectomy. Stenotic ureter-bladder anastomoses occured after LapNx in four patients during the first half year (7.0%), but this problem seemed to be resolved after modification of the technique.

Conclusion

LapNx is associated with less postoperative discomfort and improved convalescence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson CF, Velosa JA, Frohnert PP, Torres VE, Offord KP, Vogel JP, Donadia JV Jr, Wilson DM (1985) The risks of unilateral nephrectomy: status of kidney donors 10 to 20 years postoperatively. Mayo Clin Proc 60: 367–374

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Annual report of the U.S. Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients and the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (1994) Transplant data: 1988–1993 United Network for Organs Sharing, Richmond, VA, USA

  3. Blohmé I, Fehnman I, Norden G (1992) Living donor nephrectomy: complication rates in 490 cases. Scand J Nephrol 26: 149–153

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bonjer HJ, Lange JF, Kazemier G, De Herder WW, Steyerberg EW, Bruining HA (1997) Comparison of three techniques for adrenalectomy. Br J Surg 84: 679–682

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Delaitre B, Maignien, B, Icard P (1992) Laparoscopic splenectomy. Br J Surg 79: 1334

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dunn JF, Richie RE, MacDonell RC, et al (1986) Living related kidney donors: a 14-year experience. Ann Surg 26: 149–153

    Google Scholar 

  7. Eurotransplant annual report (1997)

  8. Fahy BG, Barnas GM, Flowers JL, Jacobs SC, Plotkin JS, Delaney PA (1998) Effects of split torso positioning and laparoscopic surgery for donor nephrectomy on respiratory mechanics. J Clin Anesth 10: 103–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Flowers JL, Jacobs S, Cho E, Morton A, Rosenberger WF, Evans D, et al (1997) Comparison of open and laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Ann Surg 4: 483–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gagner M, Pomp A, Heniford BT, Pharand D, Lacroix A (1997) Laparoscopic adrenalectomy: lessons learned from 100 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 226: 238–247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gill IS, Carbone JM, Clayman RV, et al (1994) Laparoscopic live donornephrectomy. J Endourol 43: 453

    Google Scholar 

  12. Guler C, Sade M, Kirkali Z (1998) Renal effects of carbon dioxide insufflation in a rabbit pneumoretroperitoneum model. J Endourol 12: 361–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hardy JD (1984) Cadaveric kidney transplants: approach of the future? Surgical capsule and comment 3: 11–12

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ishiwaka A, Suzuki K, Saisu K, Kageyama S, Ushiyama T, Fujita K (1998) Endoscopy-assisted live donor nephrectomy: comparison between laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic procedures. Transplant Proc 30: 165–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kasiske BL, Ma JZ, Louis TA, Swan SK (1995) Long-term effects of reduced renal mass in humans. Kidney Int 48: 814–819

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kerbl CK, Clayman RV, MCDougall EM, et al (1994) Transperitoneal nephrectomy for benign disease of the kidney: a comparison of laparoscopic and open surgical techniques. Urology 43: 607–613

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Laskow, et al (1991) Analysis of 22 years experience in living related at the University of Alabama in Birmingam. In: Terasaki, Cecka (eds) Clin Trans pp 179–191

  18. McDougall EM, Monk TG, Wolf JS Jr, et al. (1995) The effect of prolonged pneumoperitoneum on renal function in an animal model. J Am Coll Surg 181: 397–406

    Google Scholar 

  19. Najarian JS, Chavers BM, McHugh LE, Matas AJ (1992) 20 Years or more of follow-up of living kidney donors. Lancet 340: 807–810

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Nicholson ML, Veith PS, Donelly PK, Bell PR (1991) Urological complications of renal transplantation: the impact of double J-ureteric stents. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 73: 316–321

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Nogueira JM, Cangro CB, Fink JC, et al (1999) A comparison of recipient renal outcomes with laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 67: 722–728

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Parra RO, Perez MG, Boullier JA, Cummings JM (1995) Comparison between standard flank versus laparoscopic nephrectomy for benign disease. J Urol 153: 1171–1174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Philosophe B, Kuo PC, Schweizer EJ, Farney AC, Lim JW, et al (1999) Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy: comparing ureteral complications in the recipients and improving the laparoscopic technique. Transplantation 68: 497–502

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ratner LE, Ciseck LJ, Moore RG, Cigorra FG, Kaufman HS, Kavoussi LR (1995) Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 60: 1047–1049

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ratner LE, Kavoussi LR, Chavin KD, Montgomery R (1998) Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: technical considerations and allograft vascular length. Transplantation 65: 1657–1658 [Letter]

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ratner LE, Kavoussi LR, Schulam PG, Bender JS, Magnuson TH, Montgomery R (1997) Comparison of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy versus the standard open approach. Transplant Proc 29: 138–139

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Salomon L, Saporta F, Amsellem D, et al (1999) Results of pluoureterostomy after ureterovesical anastomosis complications in renal transplantation. Urology 53: 908–912

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Shulam PG, Kavoussi LR, Cheriff AD, Averch TD, Montgommery R, Moore RG, Ratner LE (1996) Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: the initial three cases. J Urol 55: 1857–1859

    Google Scholar 

  29. Terasaki PI, Cecka JM, Gjertson DW, Takemoto S (1995) High survival rates of kidney transplants from spousal and living unrelated donors. N Engl J Med 333: 379–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tilney, Kirkinan, et al (1993) Surgical aspects of kidney transplantation. In: Garavoy, Gutterman (eds) Renal transplantation

  31. Zucchelli P, Cagnoli L, Casanova S, et al (1983) Focal glomeru-losclerosis in patients with unilateral nephrectomy. Kidney Int 24: 649–655

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, University Hospital Dijkzigt, Dr Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    F. J. Berends, P. T. den Hoed, H. J. Bonjer, G. Kazemier & J. N. M. IJzermans

  2. Department of Nephrology, University Hospital Dijkzigt, Dr Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    I. van Riemsdijk & W. Weimar

Authors
  1. F. J. Berends
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. T. den Hoed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. J. Bonjer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. Kazemier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. I. van Riemsdijk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. W. Weimar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. J. N. M. IJzermans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Online publication: 27 February 2002

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berends, F.J., den Hoed, P.T., Bonjer, H.J. et al. Technical considerations and pitfalls in laparoscopic live donornephrectomy. Surg Endosc 16, 893–898 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640090078

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640090078

Key words

Search

Navigation