4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

A Fast and Safe Living Donor Finger-Assisted Nephrectomy Technique: Results of 359 Cases

Journal

TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS
Volume 42, Issue 1, Pages 165-170

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2009.12.042

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. To determine operative parameters and complications, using a modified approach to mini-incision living donor nephrectomy. Methods. Three hundred fifty-nine consecutive living donor procedures were performed between October 2000 and November 2008 using the finger-assisted, mini-incision living donor nephrectomy. Patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative complications were prospectively recorded, including operative time, blood loss, incision length, warm ischemia time, and intraoperative adverse events. Results. Mean donor age was 44.2 +/- 12.3 years (range, 21-75 years), with an average body mass index of 28.2 +/- 5.3 kg/m(2) (range, 17.1-44.9 kg/m(2)). Right-sided donor nephrectomies were performed on 23 patients (6%), and 41 donors (11%) were found to have multiple renal arteries. Median incision length was 6.8 cm (range, 3.5-15 cm). Average operative time was 117 minutes (range, 50-265 minutes), with a median blood loss of 109 mL (range, 20-500 mL) and an average warm ischemia time of 4.5 minutes (range, 1.5-10 minutes). Four patients (1%) required perioperative blood transfusions. There were no other intraoperative complications, no patients required reexploration, and there were no donor deaths. Thirteen patients (4%) developed minor postoperative complications, including two incisional herniae, but no patients developed chronic wound pain, over a median follow-up period of 19 months (range, 2-97 months). Conclusion. This prospective series demonstrated that a modified approach to open mini-incision nephrectomy can result in a smaller incision length while maintaining patient safety, with few postoperative complications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available