Open versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in live related renal transplantation
This analysis sought to evaluate the efficiency and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN) for the donor, the recipient, and the graft. LDN seems to have advantages over the open donor nephrectomy (ODN) in length of hospital stay, postoperative comfort, and pain control. The results of 40 patients...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Transplantation proceedings 2004-11, Vol.36 (9), p.2620-2622 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2622 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 2620 |
| container_title | Transplantation proceedings |
| container_volume | 36 |
| creator | Kaçar, S. Gürkan, A. Karaca, C. Varilsüha, C. Karaoğlan, M. Akman, F. |
| description | This analysis sought to evaluate the efficiency and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN) for the donor, the recipient, and the graft. LDN seems to have advantages over the open donor nephrectomy (ODN) in length of hospital stay, postoperative comfort, and pain control.
The results of 40 patients who underwent LDN between October 2000 and September 2003 were compared to those of 40 ODN patients just preceding the LDN patients. Eight laparoscopy patients required conversion to an open procedure due to bleeding (4; two major and two minor), technical problems with the instrument (
n = 1) and difficulty in the dissection (
n = 3).
The demographic data, percentages of right and left nephrectomy, number of vessels, rates of acute rejection episodes, as well as the rates of urologic and vascular complications were similar between the two groups. The time of hospital stay was shorter, and the duration of the operation and of the warm ischemia time were significantly longer for the LDN group. The postoperative decline in serum creatinine levels were similar for the two groups. Graft survival rates were 91.7% at both the first and third years in the LDN group; 92.5% and 87.0% for the ODN group, a difference that was not statistically significant.
LDN is as efficient and safe as ODN for donors, recipients, and grafts. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.10.024 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67198399</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S004113450401190X</els_id><sourcerecordid>67198399</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51c093b6aaff3b30370d66bef9d8b217709611b56a04e4655f16524988ff7f7d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1rGzEQhkVoiJ2Pv1CWQntbRyNptbu9FTdfEHAOyVlotSMqs5a20trgfx8Zm7THnAbxPjOaeQj5BnQBFOTtejFF7dMYg0HsF4xSkYMFZeKMzKGpeckk41_IPAdQAhfVjFymtKb5zQS_IDOoJAOg1Zy8rEb0xQ5j2qZi0KOOIZkwOlP0wYdYeBz_RDRT2OwL54vB7bCIOOgJ-1y9HorjLoP2k55c8Nfk3Ooh4c2pXpG3-7vX5WP5vHp4Wv56Lo2gzVRWYGjLO6m1tbzjlNe0l7JD2_ZNx6CuaSsBukpqKlDIqrIgKybaprG2tnXPr8iP49ys4e8W06Q2Lhkc8iIYtknJGtqGt20Gfx5Bk09LEa0ao9vouFdA1cGnWqv_faqDz0OWfebmr6dftt0mZx-tJ4EZ-H4CdDJ6sHmQcekfJwXUgrPM_T5ymJ3sHEaVjENvsHcHvaoP7jP7vAOx_JuJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67198399</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Open versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in live related renal transplantation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Kaçar, S. ; Gürkan, A. ; Karaca, C. ; Varilsüha, C. ; Karaoğlan, M. ; Akman, F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaçar, S. ; Gürkan, A. ; Karaca, C. ; Varilsüha, C. ; Karaoğlan, M. ; Akman, F.</creatorcontrib><description>This analysis sought to evaluate the efficiency and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN) for the donor, the recipient, and the graft. LDN seems to have advantages over the open donor nephrectomy (ODN) in length of hospital stay, postoperative comfort, and pain control.
The results of 40 patients who underwent LDN between October 2000 and September 2003 were compared to those of 40 ODN patients just preceding the LDN patients. Eight laparoscopy patients required conversion to an open procedure due to bleeding (4; two major and two minor), technical problems with the instrument (
n = 1) and difficulty in the dissection (
n = 3).
The demographic data, percentages of right and left nephrectomy, number of vessels, rates of acute rejection episodes, as well as the rates of urologic and vascular complications were similar between the two groups. The time of hospital stay was shorter, and the duration of the operation and of the warm ischemia time were significantly longer for the LDN group. The postoperative decline in serum creatinine levels were similar for the two groups. Graft survival rates were 91.7% at both the first and third years in the LDN group; 92.5% and 87.0% for the ODN group, a difference that was not statistically significant.
LDN is as efficient and safe as ODN for donors, recipients, and grafts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1345</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2623</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.10.024</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15621105</identifier><identifier>CODEN: TRPPA8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Cohort Studies ; Digestive system. Abdomen ; Endoscopy ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Fundamental immunology ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Living Donors ; Medical sciences ; Nephrectomy - methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgery of the urinary system ; Surgical Instruments ; Tissue and Organ Harvesting - methods ; Tissue Donors ; Tissue, organ and graft immunology</subject><ispartof>Transplantation proceedings, 2004-11, Vol.36 (9), p.2620-2622</ispartof><rights>2004 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51c093b6aaff3b30370d66bef9d8b217709611b56a04e4655f16524988ff7f7d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51c093b6aaff3b30370d66bef9d8b217709611b56a04e4655f16524988ff7f7d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.10.024$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,3539,27907,27908,45978</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=16417432$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15621105$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaçar, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gürkan, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karaca, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varilsüha, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karaoğlan, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akman, F.</creatorcontrib><title>Open versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in live related renal transplantation</title><title>Transplantation proceedings</title><addtitle>Transplant Proc</addtitle><description>This analysis sought to evaluate the efficiency and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN) for the donor, the recipient, and the graft. LDN seems to have advantages over the open donor nephrectomy (ODN) in length of hospital stay, postoperative comfort, and pain control.
The results of 40 patients who underwent LDN between October 2000 and September 2003 were compared to those of 40 ODN patients just preceding the LDN patients. Eight laparoscopy patients required conversion to an open procedure due to bleeding (4; two major and two minor), technical problems with the instrument (
n = 1) and difficulty in the dissection (
n = 3).
The demographic data, percentages of right and left nephrectomy, number of vessels, rates of acute rejection episodes, as well as the rates of urologic and vascular complications were similar between the two groups. The time of hospital stay was shorter, and the duration of the operation and of the warm ischemia time were significantly longer for the LDN group. The postoperative decline in serum creatinine levels were similar for the two groups. Graft survival rates were 91.7% at both the first and third years in the LDN group; 92.5% and 87.0% for the ODN group, a difference that was not statistically significant.
LDN is as efficient and safe as ODN for donors, recipients, and grafts.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Digestive system. Abdomen</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Fundamental immunology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Living Donors</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Nephrectomy - methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgery of the urinary system</subject><subject>Surgical Instruments</subject><subject>Tissue and Organ Harvesting - methods</subject><subject>Tissue Donors</subject><subject>Tissue, organ and graft immunology</subject><issn>0041-1345</issn><issn>1873-2623</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1rGzEQhkVoiJ2Pv1CWQntbRyNptbu9FTdfEHAOyVlotSMqs5a20trgfx8Zm7THnAbxPjOaeQj5BnQBFOTtejFF7dMYg0HsF4xSkYMFZeKMzKGpeckk41_IPAdQAhfVjFymtKb5zQS_IDOoJAOg1Zy8rEb0xQ5j2qZi0KOOIZkwOlP0wYdYeBz_RDRT2OwL54vB7bCIOOgJ-1y9HorjLoP2k55c8Nfk3Ooh4c2pXpG3-7vX5WP5vHp4Wv56Lo2gzVRWYGjLO6m1tbzjlNe0l7JD2_ZNx6CuaSsBukpqKlDIqrIgKybaprG2tnXPr8iP49ys4e8W06Q2Lhkc8iIYtknJGtqGt20Gfx5Bk09LEa0ao9vouFdA1cGnWqv_faqDz0OWfebmr6dftt0mZx-tJ4EZ-H4CdDJ6sHmQcekfJwXUgrPM_T5ymJ3sHEaVjENvsHcHvaoP7jP7vAOx_JuJ</recordid><startdate>20041101</startdate><enddate>20041101</enddate><creator>Kaçar, S.</creator><creator>Gürkan, A.</creator><creator>Karaca, C.</creator><creator>Varilsüha, C.</creator><creator>Karaoğlan, M.</creator><creator>Akman, F.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20041101</creationdate><title>Open versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in live related renal transplantation</title><author>Kaçar, S. ; Gürkan, A. ; Karaca, C. ; Varilsüha, C. ; Karaoğlan, M. ; Akman, F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-51c093b6aaff3b30370d66bef9d8b217709611b56a04e4655f16524988ff7f7d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Digestive system. Abdomen</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Fundamental immunology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Living Donors</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Nephrectomy - methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgery of the urinary system</topic><topic>Surgical Instruments</topic><topic>Tissue and Organ Harvesting - methods</topic><topic>Tissue Donors</topic><topic>Tissue, organ and graft immunology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaçar, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gürkan, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karaca, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varilsüha, C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karaoğlan, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akman, F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transplantation proceedings</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaçar, S.</au><au>Gürkan, A.</au><au>Karaca, C.</au><au>Varilsüha, C.</au><au>Karaoğlan, M.</au><au>Akman, F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Open versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in live related renal transplantation</atitle><jtitle>Transplantation proceedings</jtitle><addtitle>Transplant Proc</addtitle><date>2004-11-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>2620</spage><epage>2622</epage><pages>2620-2622</pages><issn>0041-1345</issn><eissn>1873-2623</eissn><coden>TRPPA8</coden><abstract>This analysis sought to evaluate the efficiency and safety of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LDN) for the donor, the recipient, and the graft. LDN seems to have advantages over the open donor nephrectomy (ODN) in length of hospital stay, postoperative comfort, and pain control.
The results of 40 patients who underwent LDN between October 2000 and September 2003 were compared to those of 40 ODN patients just preceding the LDN patients. Eight laparoscopy patients required conversion to an open procedure due to bleeding (4; two major and two minor), technical problems with the instrument (
n = 1) and difficulty in the dissection (
n = 3).
The demographic data, percentages of right and left nephrectomy, number of vessels, rates of acute rejection episodes, as well as the rates of urologic and vascular complications were similar between the two groups. The time of hospital stay was shorter, and the duration of the operation and of the warm ischemia time were significantly longer for the LDN group. The postoperative decline in serum creatinine levels were similar for the two groups. Graft survival rates were 91.7% at both the first and third years in the LDN group; 92.5% and 87.0% for the ODN group, a difference that was not statistically significant.
LDN is as efficient and safe as ODN for donors, recipients, and grafts.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>15621105</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.10.024</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0041-1345 |
| ispartof | Transplantation proceedings, 2004-11, Vol.36 (9), p.2620-2622 |
| issn | 0041-1345 1873-2623 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67198399 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Cohort Studies Digestive system. Abdomen Endoscopy Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Fundamental immunology Humans Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Living Donors Medical sciences Nephrectomy - methods Retrospective Studies Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgery of the urinary system Surgical Instruments Tissue and Organ Harvesting - methods Tissue Donors Tissue, organ and graft immunology |
| title | Open versus laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in live related renal transplantation |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T23%3A35%3A17IST&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=Open%20versus%20laparoscopic%20donor%20nephrectomy%20in%20live%20related%20renal%20transplantation&rft.jtitle=Transplantation%20proceedings&rft.au=Ka%C3%A7ar,%20S.&rft.date=2004-11-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=2620&rft.epage=2622&rft.pages=2620-2622&rft.issn=0041-1345&rft.eissn=1873-2623&rft.coden=TRPPA8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.10.024&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67198399%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=67198399&rft_id=info:pmid/15621105&rft_els_id=S004113450401190X&rfr_iscdi=true |