More information on Laparoscopic Renal Donation...

Click here for more in-depth information about Laparoscopic Kidney Donation....
Detailed information about patient selection, the surgical procedure, and the UAB experience with laparoscopic donation.
Following is a summary of the research findings by the UAB Laparoscopic Donor Surgeons.
RESULTS OF LAPAROSCOPIC DONOR NEPHRECTOMY
Rizk El-Galley*, Nidra Hood, Mark Deierhoi, and Donald Urban Birmingham, Alabama
Purpose:
Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is gaining more popularity among kidney donors and transplant surgeons. There have been some concerns about the function of the kidney grafts harvested by laparoscopic procedures. We reviewed our results for our laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.
Patients and Methods:
During the past eight months, we have performed twenty laparoscopic donor nephrectomies. We compared the outcome of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with open donor nephrectomies preformed during the same time.
Results:

In the laparoscopy group, the mean age was 38 years 12 patients were females and 8 patients were males. Eighteen patients were white and two were African Americans.

Thirteen patients were donating a kidney to a first degree relative.

These criteria were similar in patients who had open donor nephrectomies.

The mean operative time was 322 minutes for laparoscopy versus 156 minutes for open operations, and the mean blood loss was 213 cc versus 322 for laparoscopy and open procedures respectively.

The mean warm ischemia time was 4.3 minutes and 1.8 minutes for laparoscopy and open operations respectively (p=0.002). Postoperative hospitalization was 2.7 days for laparoscopy and 3.3 days for open procedures (p=0.005). Laparoscopic patients required less narcotic medicines (8 units) than open cases (12 units).

There were no major complications in the laparoscopic cases and one patient (second in the series) was converted to open because of suprarenal vein bleeding. No complete or partial graft loss was encountered.

Two patients in the laparoscopic group, early in the series, were readmitted two days after discharge for abdominal distention and they were managed conservatively and discharged within 48 hours.

Mean follow up was 4 and 7 months for laparoscopic and open surgery respectively.

The recipient creatinine was not significantly different for kidneys that were harvested with laparoscopic or open procedures (1.6 and 1.5 for laparoscopy and open operations respectively, p = 0.7).

Diuretic renograms (MAG3) were performed for all recipients 1 to 3 days after surgery. The mean effective renal plasma flow was 425±95 for the laparoscopic group versus 447±154 for the open group (p=0.6).

Return to normal physical activity at 3 weeks was reported by 72% of laparoscopic patients versus 40% of open donor patients. Seventy-one percent of laparoscopy patients were able to return to work in 2 weeks and 86% were able to return to work in 4 weeks. In the open operation group, none returned to work in 4 weeks and 50% returned to work in 6 weeks.

Satisfaction with the operation was reported to be excellent in 75% of laparoscopy patients and 40% in open donor patients.

All patients in both groups would recommend their procedure to a friend

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has good results with regards to graft function. The procedure is safe and complications are acceptable. Patient recovery and return to normal activities are earlier than open procedures.

UAB Health System
UAB Health System

UAB Health System

Login