PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10353553

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: the preliminary experience.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent improvements in video technology and surgical instrumentation have resulted in the application of minimally invasive techniques to many surgical procedures including splenectomy and adrenalectomy. Nephrectomy requires a long flank incision with division of abdominal musculature and possible subcostal nerve damage. Severe postoperative pain and a prolonged recuperative period may result, and the cosmetic outcome may not be satisfactory. A new surgical approach utilizing laparoscopic dissection and delivery of the kidney through a small incision was performed to circumvent these problems. The aim of this paper is to describe the technique of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LLDN) and present the preliminary outcome. METHODS: Over the 12-month period between May 1997 and April 1998, 16 donors underwent donor nephrectomy by a laparoscopic approach. The procedure was assessed with regard to its safety, feasibility and advantages over the open method. RESULTS: All the nephrectomies were completed without conversion to an open procedure. The average postoperative pain score on a visual analogue scale of 1-10 was 2 in LLDN. The donors required 36 mg morphine on average over 36 h postoperatively. Postoperative stay averaged 3 days. One donor developed an infective complication along the wound drain tract which settled with adequate drainage and antibiotics. All the removed donor kidneys were transplanted with immediate good function. There were no surgical complications or graft losses. The recipients' serum creatinine was in the range of 96-181 mmol/L 3 months after transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Significant potential advantages of LLDN include less postoperative pain, shorter hospitalization and decreased recuperative time. This preliminary experience indicates LLDN to be effective in terms of safety and feasibility.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C Hensman, G Lionel, P Hewett, M M Rao. 1999. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: the preliminary experience.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1622.1999.01574.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Retropubic versus perineal radical prostatectomy in early prostate cancer: eight-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in men and the second leading cause of cancer death. A randomized study was performed on patients with localized prostate cancer and treated with radical prostatectomy using the perineal or the retropubic approach comparing oncological outcomes, cancer control, and functional results. STUDY DESIGN: Between 1997 and 2004, in a randomized study 200 patients underwent a radical prostatectomy performed by retropubic (100 patients) or perineal (100 patients) approach. RESULTS: Differences between hospital stay, duration of catheter drainage, intraoperative blood loss, and transfusion requirements were statistically significant in favor of perineal prostatectomy. Differences between positive surgical margins and urinary continence in the two groups were not statistically significant at 6 and 24 months. Differences between erectile function at 24 months were statistically significant in favor of retropubic prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Radical perineal prostatectomy is an excellent alternative approach for radical surgery in the treatment of early prostate cancer.

Blood Loss, Surgical↗

Bipolar pulse coagulation for resection of the cirrhotic liver.

BACKGROUND: The major technical challenge of liver surgery is controlling bleeding during transection of the parenchyma. The Gyrus hand piece (GHP) is a bipolar diathermy pulsation instrument that is similar in design to a large hemostat (Péan) clamp that divides tissue while the clamp remains closed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the peri-operative data from 10 patients with early cirrhosis (stage 1-4) who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular cancer between February 2004 and July 2005. Five consecutive patients who underwent resection using the GHP were compared to five other patients who underwent resection using the traditional "crush clamp technique" (CCT). Six patients underwent minor hepatectomy (<3 segments) and four underwent major hepatectomy (>3 segments). RESULTS: When the GHP was used, the mean Pringle time was 13 +/- 5 min, mean blood loss was 520 mL +/- 118, and mean operative time was 252 +/- 15 min. When the CCT was used, the average Pringle time was 13 +/- 3 min, mean blood loss was 630 +/- 67 mL, and mean operative time was 312 +/- 29 min. There were 2 major complications in the GHP group and 3 in the CCT group. Major complications included transient hepatic failure (i.e., ascites/encephalopathy) and biloma formation. CONCLUSIONS: One patient from each group suffered a minor wound complication. The average hospital stay was 8 days (range, 6-9) for the GHP group, and 8 days (range, 7-10) for CCT group. The operative mortality rate was 0%. Our preliminary results demonstrate that GHP provides an excellent and safe alternative to CCT for dividing the liver parenchyma in cirrhotic patients.

Blood Loss, Surgical↗