Skip to main content

Retroperitoneoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Since the first living-related kidney transplant in 1965, removal of the donated kidney was done by an open operation [1, 2]. Ways to minimise the morbidity of access included video-assisted mini-incision donor nephrectomy [3]. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) was first described by Ratner et al. in 1995 [4] and was accomplished by the transperitoneal route. This operation can be done by transperitoneal or retroperitoneal route. In this chapter we allude to the nuaces of port placement, dissection and troubleshooting in retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cecka JM. Clinical transplants 1995. In: Cecka JM, PI T, editors. Living donor transplants. Los Angeles: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory; 1995. p. 363.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chatterjee S, Nam R, Fleshner N, Klotz L. Permanent flank bulge is a consequence of flank incision for radical nephrectomy in one half of patients. Urol Oncol. 2004;22:36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yang SC, Rha KH, Kim YS, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic-assisted living donor nephrectomy: 109 cases. Transplant Proc. 2001;33:1104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ratner LE, Ciseck LJ, Moore RG, et al. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation. 1995;60:1047.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wadstrom J. Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy: experience from the first 75 consecutive cases. Transplantation. 2005;80(8):1060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gershbein AB, Fuchs. Hand assisted and conventional live donor nephrectomy: a; comparison of two contemporary techniques. J Endourol. 2002;16(7):509–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lindstrom P, Haggman M, Wadstrom J. Hand assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is more time and cost-effective than standard laparoscopic nephrectomy. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(3):422.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Greenstein MA, Harkaway R, Bodosa, et al. Minimal incision open living nephrectomy compared to hand assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. World J Urol. 2003;20:356.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gaur DD. Laparoscopic operative retroperitoneoscopy: use of a new device. J Urol. 1992;148(4):1137–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gill IS, Uzzo RG, Hobart MG, et al. Laparoscopic retroperitoneal live donor right nephrectomy for purposes of allotransplantation and autotransplantation. J Urol. 2000;164:1500.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. A report of the Amsterdam forum on the care of the live kidney donor: data and medical guidelines. Transplantation 2005; 79: S53–S66.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Modi PR, Goel R, Dodia S. Retroperitoneoscopic left donor nephrectomy: use of Hem-o-lok clips for control of renal pedicle. J Endourol. 2007;21:1029–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Simforoosh N, Aminsharifi A, Zand S, et al. How to improve the safety of polymer clips during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2007;21:1319–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Modi P, Kadam G, Devra A. Obtaining a cuff of inferior vena cava by use of the endo-TA stapler in retroperitoneoscopic right-side donor nephrectomy. Urology. 2007;69(5):832.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Omoto K, Nozaki T, Inui M, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy with multiple renal arteries does not affect graft survival and ureteral complications. Transplantation. 2014;98:1175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Modi PR, Rizvi SJ, Gupta R. Retroperitoneoscopic right-sided donor nephrectomy with pre- and postcaval renal arteries. Urology. 2008;72:672.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Modi PR, Rizvi SJ. Two renal veins are not a contraindication to retroperitoneoscopic right donor nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2008;22(7):1491.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rizvi SJ, Prasad TK, Modi PR. Retroperitoneoscopic left donor nephrectomy with duplicated IVC. Indian J Nephrol. 2012;22(6):480–1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Velidedeoglu E, Williams N, Brayman KL, et al. Comparison of open, laparoscopic and hand assisted approaches to live-donor nephrectomy. Transplantation. 2002;74:169–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schweitzer EJ, Wilson J, Jacobs S, et al. Increased rates of donation with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Ann Surg. 2000;232:392.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Shokeir AA. Open versus laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a focus on the safety of donors and the need for a donor registry. J Urol. 2007;178(5):1860–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chin EH, Hazzan D, Edye M, et al. The first decade of a laparoscopic donor nephrectomy program: effect of surgeon and institution experience with 512 cases from 1996 to 2006. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209:106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yoshimura K, Takahara S, Kyakuno M, et al. J Endourol. 2005;19(7):808.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bachmann A, Wolff T, Ruszat R, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy: a retrospective, non-randomised comparison of early complications, donor and recipient outcome with the standard open approach. Eur Urol. 2005;48:90–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tanabe K, Miyamoto N, Ishida H. Retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy (RPLDN): Establishment and initial experience of RPLDN at a single centre. Am J Transplant. 2005;5:739.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kohei N, Kazuya O, Hirai T, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy: experience of 425 cases at a single centre. J Endourol. 2010;24(11):1783.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bachmann A, Wolff T, Giannini O, et al. How painful is donor nephrectomy? Retrospective analysis of early pain and pain management in open versus laparoscopic versus retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy. Transplantation. 2006;81(12):1735.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ruszat R, Sulser T, Dickenmann M, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy: donor outcome and complication rate in comparison with three different techniques. World J Urol. 2006;24:113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ma L, Ye J, Huang Y, et al. Retroperitoneoscopic live-donor nephrectomy: 5-year single-centre experience in China. Int J Urol. 2010;17:158.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ruszat R, Wyler SF, Wolff T, et al. Reluctance over right-sided retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy: justified or not? Transplant Proc. 2007;39:1381–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gao Z, Wu J, Yang D. Retroperitoneoscopic right living donor nephrectomy. Chin Med J. 2007;120(14):1270.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Jacobs S, Cho E, Foster C, et al. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: the University of Maryland 6-year experience. J Urol. 2004;171:47–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Aerts J, Matas A, Sutherland D, et al. Chylous ascites requiring surgical intervention after donor nephrectomy: case series and single centre experience. Am J Transplant. 2010;10(1):124.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sharma S, Rizvi SJ, Modi PR. Medical management of chyloretroperitoneum following retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy. Indian J Nephrol. 2014;24(2):139.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Burgos FJ, Pascual J, Briones G, et al. Influence of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy in ischemia-reperfusion syndrome and renal function after kidney transplantation: and experimental study. Transplant Proc. 2003;35:1664–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chiu AW, Chang LS, Burkitt DH. The impact of pneumoperitoneum, pneumoretroperitoneum and gasless laparoscopy on the systemic and renal hemodynamics. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;181(5):397.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ye J, Huang Y, Hou X. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a cost-effective approach. Urology. 2010;75(1):92–5.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. R. Modi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rizvi, S.J., Modi, P.R. (2017). Retroperitoneoscopic Donor Nephrectomy. In: Desai, M., Ganpule, A. (eds) Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2849-6_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2849-6_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2847-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2849-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics