Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies: early experience and review of the literature
With over 80,000 patients in the United States awaiting kidney transplantation, renal transplant surgery continues to evolve with attractive surgical options for living donation, which include laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN). LDN is cu...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of robotic surgery 2011-06, Vol.5 (2), p.115-120 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 120 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 115 |
| container_title | Journal of robotic surgery |
| container_volume | 5 |
| creator | Geffner, Stuart Klaassen, Zachary Tichauer, Matthew Chamberlain, Ronald S. Paragi, Prakash R. |
| description | With over 80,000 patients in the United States awaiting kidney transplantation, renal transplant surgery continues to evolve with attractive surgical options for living donation, which include laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN). LDN is currently accepted as the gold standard procedure for living donor nephrectomy; RALDN is an evolving technique and may emerge as a preferred procedure over time. We present our initial experience with RALDN from December 2007 to August 2008. Thirty-five patients who underwent RALND were retrospectively analyzed and compared with 35 age- and time (year)-matched patients who underwent LDN. The parameters analyzed were length of hospital stay (3.2 ± 0.9 days,
P
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11701-011-0245-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1821789404</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1821789404</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-d1c3fef44b400a1f9bc9582f42757b18c37313e21c2debf9786aa7fb36a811e13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kFFLHDEQx0NRenrtB_BFAr70ZWsm2b1k-yZH1YIgiH1Os9lJzbG32Sa7Wv305rjrFQQfhhnIb_4TfoScAPsKjMnzBCAZFAxy8bIqXj6QI1ALUfCyhoP9rMSMHKe0YqySlYCPZMblQuRRHpFfd6EJo7eFScmnEVvamcHEkGwYvKVt6EOkPQ4PEe0Y1h7TN4omds8U_w4YPfYWqelbGvHR4xMNjo4PSDs_YjTjFPETOXSmS_h51-fk5-X3--V1cXN79WN5cVNYIflYtGCFQ1eWTcmYAVc3tq4UdyWXlWxAZUqAQA6Wt9i4WqqFMdI1YmEUAIKYky_b3CGGPxOmUa99sth1pscwJQ2Kg1R1ycqMnr1BV2GKff6d5jUoCaLmIlOwpWy2kSI6PUS_NvFZA9Mb_XqrX2f9eqNfv-Sd013y1Kyx3W_8850BvgVSfup_Y_x_-v3UVzJ6kVs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2918713923</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies: early experience and review of the literature</title><source>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</source><source>Springer Online Journals Complete</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><source>ProQuest Central</source><creator>Geffner, Stuart ; Klaassen, Zachary ; Tichauer, Matthew ; Chamberlain, Ronald S. ; Paragi, Prakash R.</creator><creatorcontrib>Geffner, Stuart ; Klaassen, Zachary ; Tichauer, Matthew ; Chamberlain, Ronald S. ; Paragi, Prakash R.</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[With over 80,000 patients in the United States awaiting kidney transplantation, renal transplant surgery continues to evolve with attractive surgical options for living donation, which include laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN). LDN is currently accepted as the gold standard procedure for living donor nephrectomy; RALDN is an evolving technique and may emerge as a preferred procedure over time. We present our initial experience with RALDN from December 2007 to August 2008. Thirty-five patients who underwent RALND were retrospectively analyzed and compared with 35 age- and time (year)-matched patients who underwent LDN. The parameters analyzed were length of hospital stay (3.2 ± 0.9 days,
P
< 0.59), estimated blood loss (146 ± 363 ml,
P
< 0.36), operating time (149 ± 44 min,
P
< 0.23), cold ischemic time (135 ± 202 min,
P
< 0.19), preoperative creatinine (0.82 ± 0.26 mg/dl,
P
< 0.46) and postoperative creatinine (1.44 ± 1.03 mg/dl,
P
< 0.20). There was no statistical difference between RALDN patients with single renal artery (
n
= 27) and those with more than one renal artery (
n
= 8) kidneys. There was one serious complication requiring conversion to open laparotomy to control a bleeding renal artery stump following extraction of the kidney. One-year graft survival for the 35 recipients of RALDN was 97.1%. RALDN is feasible and compares favorably to the standard LDN procedure with good graft survival. Robotic-assisted transplant surgery is an emerging technique with potential benefits to both surgeon and patient.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 1863-2483</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1863-2491</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11701-011-0245-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27637537</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Age ; Body mass index ; Cold ; Creatinine ; Ischemia ; Kidney transplants ; Laparoscopy ; Length of stay ; Literature reviews ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Minimally Invasive Surgery ; Original Article ; Patients ; Robotic surgery ; Surgeons ; Surgery ; Survival ; Urology ; Veins & arteries</subject><ispartof>Journal of robotic surgery, 2011-06, Vol.5 (2), p.115-120</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag London Ltd 2011</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag London Ltd 2011.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-d1c3fef44b400a1f9bc9582f42757b18c37313e21c2debf9786aa7fb36a811e13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-d1c3fef44b400a1f9bc9582f42757b18c37313e21c2debf9786aa7fb36a811e13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11701-011-0245-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2918713923?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21388,21389,27924,27925,33530,33531,33744,33745,41488,42557,43659,43805,51319,64385,64387,64389,72341</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27637537$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Geffner, Stuart</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klaassen, Zachary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tichauer, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chamberlain, Ronald S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paragi, Prakash R.</creatorcontrib><title>Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies: early experience and review of the literature</title><title>Journal of robotic surgery</title><addtitle>J Robotic Surg</addtitle><addtitle>J Robot Surg</addtitle><description><![CDATA[With over 80,000 patients in the United States awaiting kidney transplantation, renal transplant surgery continues to evolve with attractive surgical options for living donation, which include laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN). LDN is currently accepted as the gold standard procedure for living donor nephrectomy; RALDN is an evolving technique and may emerge as a preferred procedure over time. We present our initial experience with RALDN from December 2007 to August 2008. Thirty-five patients who underwent RALND were retrospectively analyzed and compared with 35 age- and time (year)-matched patients who underwent LDN. The parameters analyzed were length of hospital stay (3.2 ± 0.9 days,
P
< 0.59), estimated blood loss (146 ± 363 ml,
P
< 0.36), operating time (149 ± 44 min,
P
< 0.23), cold ischemic time (135 ± 202 min,
P
< 0.19), preoperative creatinine (0.82 ± 0.26 mg/dl,
P
< 0.46) and postoperative creatinine (1.44 ± 1.03 mg/dl,
P
< 0.20). There was no statistical difference between RALDN patients with single renal artery (
n
= 27) and those with more than one renal artery (
n
= 8) kidneys. There was one serious complication requiring conversion to open laparotomy to control a bleeding renal artery stump following extraction of the kidney. One-year graft survival for the 35 recipients of RALDN was 97.1%. RALDN is feasible and compares favorably to the standard LDN procedure with good graft survival. Robotic-assisted transplant surgery is an emerging technique with potential benefits to both surgeon and patient.]]></description><subject>Age</subject><subject>Body mass index</subject><subject>Cold</subject><subject>Creatinine</subject><subject>Ischemia</subject><subject>Kidney transplants</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Length of stay</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgery</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Robotic surgery</subject><subject>Surgeons</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>Urology</subject><subject>Veins & arteries</subject><issn>1863-2483</issn><issn>1863-2491</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kFFLHDEQx0NRenrtB_BFAr70ZWsm2b1k-yZH1YIgiH1Os9lJzbG32Sa7Wv305rjrFQQfhhnIb_4TfoScAPsKjMnzBCAZFAxy8bIqXj6QI1ALUfCyhoP9rMSMHKe0YqySlYCPZMblQuRRHpFfd6EJo7eFScmnEVvamcHEkGwYvKVt6EOkPQ4PEe0Y1h7TN4omds8U_w4YPfYWqelbGvHR4xMNjo4PSDs_YjTjFPETOXSmS_h51-fk5-X3--V1cXN79WN5cVNYIflYtGCFQ1eWTcmYAVc3tq4UdyWXlWxAZUqAQA6Wt9i4WqqFMdI1YmEUAIKYky_b3CGGPxOmUa99sth1pscwJQ2Kg1R1ycqMnr1BV2GKff6d5jUoCaLmIlOwpWy2kSI6PUS_NvFZA9Mb_XqrX2f9eqNfv-Sd013y1Kyx3W_8850BvgVSfup_Y_x_-v3UVzJ6kVs</recordid><startdate>20110601</startdate><enddate>20110601</enddate><creator>Geffner, Stuart</creator><creator>Klaassen, Zachary</creator><creator>Tichauer, Matthew</creator><creator>Chamberlain, Ronald S.</creator><creator>Paragi, Prakash R.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110601</creationdate><title>Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies: early experience and review of the literature</title><author>Geffner, Stuart ; Klaassen, Zachary ; Tichauer, Matthew ; Chamberlain, Ronald S. ; Paragi, Prakash R.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-d1c3fef44b400a1f9bc9582f42757b18c37313e21c2debf9786aa7fb36a811e13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Age</topic><topic>Body mass index</topic><topic>Cold</topic><topic>Creatinine</topic><topic>Ischemia</topic><topic>Kidney transplants</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Length of stay</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgery</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Robotic surgery</topic><topic>Surgeons</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>Urology</topic><topic>Veins & arteries</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Geffner, Stuart</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Klaassen, Zachary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tichauer, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chamberlain, Ronald S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paragi, Prakash R.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of robotic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Geffner, Stuart</au><au>Klaassen, Zachary</au><au>Tichauer, Matthew</au><au>Chamberlain, Ronald S.</au><au>Paragi, Prakash R.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies: early experience and review of the literature</atitle><jtitle>Journal of robotic surgery</jtitle><stitle>J Robotic Surg</stitle><addtitle>J Robot Surg</addtitle><date>2011-06-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>115</spage><epage>120</epage><pages>115-120</pages><issn>1863-2483</issn><eissn>1863-2491</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[With over 80,000 patients in the United States awaiting kidney transplantation, renal transplant surgery continues to evolve with attractive surgical options for living donation, which include laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN). LDN is currently accepted as the gold standard procedure for living donor nephrectomy; RALDN is an evolving technique and may emerge as a preferred procedure over time. We present our initial experience with RALDN from December 2007 to August 2008. Thirty-five patients who underwent RALND were retrospectively analyzed and compared with 35 age- and time (year)-matched patients who underwent LDN. The parameters analyzed were length of hospital stay (3.2 ± 0.9 days,
P
< 0.59), estimated blood loss (146 ± 363 ml,
P
< 0.36), operating time (149 ± 44 min,
P
< 0.23), cold ischemic time (135 ± 202 min,
P
< 0.19), preoperative creatinine (0.82 ± 0.26 mg/dl,
P
< 0.46) and postoperative creatinine (1.44 ± 1.03 mg/dl,
P
< 0.20). There was no statistical difference between RALDN patients with single renal artery (
n
= 27) and those with more than one renal artery (
n
= 8) kidneys. There was one serious complication requiring conversion to open laparotomy to control a bleeding renal artery stump following extraction of the kidney. One-year graft survival for the 35 recipients of RALDN was 97.1%. RALDN is feasible and compares favorably to the standard LDN procedure with good graft survival. Robotic-assisted transplant surgery is an emerging technique with potential benefits to both surgeon and patient.]]></abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>27637537</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11701-011-0245-z</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1863-2483 |
| ispartof | Journal of robotic surgery, 2011-06, Vol.5 (2), p.115-120 |
| issn | 1863-2483 1863-2491 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1821789404 |
| source | ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition); Springer Online Journals Complete; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland; ProQuest Central |
| subjects | Age Body mass index Cold Creatinine Ischemia Kidney transplants Laparoscopy Length of stay Literature reviews Medicine Medicine & Public Health Minimally Invasive Surgery Original Article Patients Robotic surgery Surgeons Surgery Survival Urology Veins & arteries |
| title | Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies: early experience and review of the literature |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T02%3A33%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Robotic-assisted%20laparoscopic%20donor%20nephrectomies:%20early%20experience%20and%20review%20of%20the%20literature&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20robotic%20surgery&rft.au=Geffner,%20Stuart&rft.date=2011-06-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=115&rft.epage=120&rft.pages=115-120&rft.issn=1863-2483&rft.eissn=1863-2491&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11701-011-0245-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1821789404%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2918713923&rft_id=info:pmid/27637537&rfr_iscdi=true |