Laparoscopic live‐donor nephrectomy: modifications for developing nations

BJU International - Tập 93 Số 9 - Trang 1291-1295 - 2004
Ashok Kumar1, Himanshu Chaudhary1, Aneesh Srivastava1, M. Raghavendran1
1Department of Urology & Renal Transplantation, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India.

Tóm tắt

Authors from Lucknow describe their experience with laparoscopic live‐donor nephrectomy, and describe modifications they have used to make the procedure cost‐effective for developing nations. As the urological world is increasingly realising, this approach to renal transplantation is increasing the number of live‐donor kidneys being offered for the many patients with end‐stage renal failure. In this considerable series, the authors are strongly of the opinion that this is the best approach to live donor nephrectomy, and that their modifications are helpful in its use in developing nations.OBJECTIVETo describe modifications to laparoscopic live‐donor nephrectomy (LLDN) to make it more cost‐effective for developing countries; LLDN was developed as a better alternative to conventional donor nephrectomy, with advantages of an earlier return to normal activities and smaller scars, but is not popular in developing countries because of high cost of disposable items.PATIENTS AND METHODSFrom January 2000 to January 2002, 148 LLDNs were performed, of which two used a hand‐assisted technique, 17 the standard technique, 79 a modified laparoscopically assisted cost‐saving approach and 50 by the modified technique. In the latter approach the kidney was delivered through a 6–8 cm anterior subcostal flank incision. In last 50 patients we further modified the technique, clipping the hilum using endoclips and delivering the kidney by holding the lateral pararenal fat through a 5 cm iliac fossa incision.RESULTSThe mean age, operative duration, warm ischaemia time, blood loss, analgesic requirements, pain score and hospital stay were comparable among the various techniques used. Re‐exploration was required in four patients (bleeding in two, trocar‐induced bowel injury in two). Immediate complications after surgery occurred in 20% of patients. Using endoclips, the cost was considerably reduced, from $400 to $290. The iliac fossa incision was aesthetically pleasing and more acceptable to patients.CONCLUSIONThese modifications are relevant in the context of a developing nation, as they provide all the benefits of LLDN at reduced cost and with better cosmetic results.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Ratner LE, 1995, Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy, Transplantation, 60, 1047

10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64547-8

10.1089/089277902753716115

Arvind NK, 2002, Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. An Indian perspective, Indian J Urol, 19, 29, 10.4103/0970-1591.20288

Kumar A, 2004, Mini incision donor nephrectomy. An optimal approach for the developing countries, Clin Transplantation

10.1097/00000658-200009000-00011

10.1097/00007890-199908270-00024

10.1001/archsurg.135.8.943

10.1016/S0022-5347(05)67014-0

10.1097/00007890-199701270-00009

10.1016/S0041-1345(00)00936-2

10.1097/00000658-198302000-00010

10.1097/00000658-199710000-00009

Ratner LE, 1998, Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: long term results (Abstract), J Urol, 159, 182

10.1097/00007890-199903150-00014

10.1016/S0041-1345(98)01526-7

Ratner LE, 1999, Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: the four‐year Johns Hopkins University experience, Nephrol Dial Transplant, 14, 2090, 10.1093/ndt/14.9.2090

Kumar A, 2002, A prospective comparison of three techniques of live donor nephrectomy: can mini flank incision be an alternative to laparoscopic surgery (Abstract), J Urol, 167, 21

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

BJU International

Tập 93 Số 9

1291-1295

Thông tin tác giả