Living donor nephrectomy: Flank incision versus anterior vertical mini-incision

被引:45
作者
Neipp, M [1 ]
Jackobs, S [1 ]
Becker, T [1 ]
Vilsendorf, AMZ [1 ]
Winny, M [1 ]
Lueck, R [1 ]
Klempnauer, J [1 ]
Nashan, B [1 ]
机构
[1] Hannover Med Sch, Viszeral & Transplantat Chirurg Klin, Dept Transplantat, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
关键词
living donation; kidney; nephrectomy; outcome; minimal invasive;
D O I
10.1097/01.TP.0000140975.96729.A7
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background. Currently, many centers perform laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (DN). We studied the outcome of donors and recipients following open DN using either flank incision (ODN) or mini-incision (MIDN). Methods. Data of 196 living kidney donors were recorded prospectively. In 127 cases ODN and 69 cases MIDN were performed. Results. Demographic details of donors were comparable for both groups. The left kidney was procured in 58% for ODN and in 64% for MIDN. Multiple arteries were more frequently present when MIDN (11% vs. 28%) was performed. The mean operating time was 129 min for ODN and 133 min for MIDN. Early complications occurred in 7% following ODN and in 4% following MIDN. Late complications were observed in 21% after ODN and 1% after MIDN. The mean hospital stay was significantly longer following ODN compared with MIDN (7.5 vs. 6.4 days). The primary graft function rate was 97% in both groups. One-year graft survival was 97% after ODN and 100% after MIDN. Conclusions. Results following MIDN are superior to those following ODN. Even in case of multiple renal vessels MIDN can be safely applied. In comparison with laparoscopic DN advantages of MIDN may be reduced costs, shorter operating time, and comparable cosmetic results.
引用
收藏
页码:1356 / 1361
页数:6
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: Con
    Barry, JM
    [J]. TRANSPLANTATION, 2000, 70 (10) : 1546 - 1548
  • [2] Complications of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: The first 175 cases
    Chan, DY
    Fabrizio, MD
    Ratner, LE
    Kavoussi, LR
    [J]. TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2000, 32 (04) : 778 - 778
  • [3] Laparoscopic transperitoneal donornephrectomy.: Technique and results
    Giessing, M
    Deger, S
    Ebeling, V
    Roigas, J
    Türk, I
    Loening, SA
    [J]. UROLOGE A, 2003, 42 (02): : 218 - +
  • [4] Minimal incision living donor nephrectomy compared to the hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy
    Greenstein, MA
    Harkaway, R
    Badosa, F
    Ginsberg, P
    Yang, SL
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 20 (06) : 356 - 359
  • [5] Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: The University of Maryland 6-year experience
    Jacobs, SC
    Cho, E
    Foster, C
    Liao, P
    Bartlett, ST
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2004, 171 (01) : 47 - 51
  • [6] Jones KW, 1999, AM SURGEON, V65, P197
  • [7] Laparoscopic vs open nephrectomy in 210 consecutive patients - Outcomes, cost, and changes in practice patterns
    Kercher, KW
    Heniford, BT
    Matthews, BD
    Smith, TI
    Lincourt, AE
    Hayes, DH
    Eskind, LB
    Irby, PB
    Teigland, CM
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2003, 17 (12): : 1889 - 1895
  • [8] Mini incision live donor nephrectomy: an optimal approach for the developing countries
    Kumar, A
    Tripathi, DM
    Srivastava, A
    [J]. CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, 2003, 17 (06) : 498 - 502
  • [9] Live donor nephrectomy and return to work - Does the operative technique matter?
    Lind, MY
    Liem, YS
    Bemelman, WA
    Dooper, PMM
    Hop, WCJ
    Weimar, W
    IJzermans, JNM
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2003, 17 (04): : 591 - 595
  • [10] Hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy
    Maartense, S
    Idu, M
    Bemelman, FJ
    Balm, R
    Surachno, S
    Bemelman, WA
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2004, 91 (03) : 344 - 348