Introducing robot‐assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy after experience in retroperitoneal endoscopic approach: a matched propensity score analysis. Issue 3 (19th December 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Thai, Minh Sam; Chau, Quy Thuan; Hoang, Khac Chuan; Ngo, Xuan Thai; Tran, Trong Tri; Nguyen, Trong Hien; Thai, Kinh Luan; Vu, Duc Huy; Dinh, Le Quy Van; Pham, Duc Minh; Tiong, Ho Yee; Nguyen, Tuan Thanh
• Is Part Of: ANZ journal of surgery. Volume 92:Issue 3(2022)
• Page Start: 531
• Page End: 537
• Publication Date: 2021-12-19
• Subjects: kidney transplantation -- living donors -- minimally invasive surgery -- retroperitoneal endoscopic donor nephrectomy -- robotic surgery; Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1111/ans.17424
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1445-1433

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: To assess the safety and efficacy of introducing robotic‐assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN) to the standard retroperitoneal endoscopic donor nephrectomy (REDN). Methods: Data were collected prospectively from 124 consecutive living kidney donors (93 for REDN subgroup and 31 for RALDN subgroup) from February 2018 to December 2020. Donor baseline demographics, perioperative outcomes and recipient outcomes were recorded, and these parameters were compared between the two subgroups before and after propensity‐score matching. Results: Mean age was 51.1 ± 9.1 years; 42.7% were males; mean body mass index was 22.7 ± 2.4; and there were 109 (88%) left kidneys. The following data of REDN and RALDN was, respectively, recorded: operative time (213 ± 43 versus 216 ± 39 min, p = 0.721), warm ischemic time (4.7 ± 1.2 versus 4.9 ± 1.4 min, p = 0.399), postoperative complications (5.4% versus 6.5%, p = 1), haemoglobin (g/L) drop (9.4 ± 7.2 versus 9.7 ± 6.6, p = 0.836), blood creatinine at 6 month (1.15 ± 0.23 versus 1.13 ± 0.24 mg/dL, p = 0.734) and at 1 year (1.09 ± 0.22 versus 1.17 ± 0.28 mg/dL, p = 0.591). In post‐propensity score matched analyses, there was no significant differences between the two groups including intraoperative and postoperative complications. Conclusions: RALDN could be safely introduced into a living donor program experienced in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The outcomes of our study comparing these minimally invasive techniques are mostly similar in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes for kidney donors. Abstract : Robotic‐assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy could be safely introduced into a living donor program experienced in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The outcomes of our study comparing these minimally invasive techniques are mostly similar in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes for kidney donors.