Laparoscopy, dorsal lumbotomy and flank incision live donor nephrectomy: comparison of donor outcomes

Flank incision (FL), dorsal lumbotomy (DL) and laparoscopic surgery have been effective approaches to donor nephrectomy. While laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become increasingly popular, there has yet to be a direct comparison of the three modalities. We performed a retrospective chart rev...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Canadian Urological Association journal 2013-02, Vol.7 (1-2), p.E69-E73
Hauptverfasser: Samarasekera, Dinesh, Kim, David S H, Wang, Rachel, Yip, Gordon, Tang, Steven S, Nguan, Christopher
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page E73
container_issue 1-2
container_start_page E69
container_title Canadian Urological Association journal
container_volume 7
creator Samarasekera, Dinesh
Kim, David S H
Wang, Rachel
Yip, Gordon
Tang, Steven S
Nguan, Christopher
description Flank incision (FL), dorsal lumbotomy (DL) and laparoscopic surgery have been effective approaches to donor nephrectomy. While laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become increasingly popular, there has yet to be a direct comparison of the three modalities. We performed a retrospective chart review of FL, DL and LDN operations between 2002 and 2010 within a single institution. Donor and recipient characteristics, as well as surgical outcomes, were assessed. There were 496 donor nephrectomy operations available for analyses. Patients in the LDN group had the lowest estimated blood loss, compared to the DL and FL groups (p < 0.001), lowest rate of complications (p < 0.01), and shortest hospital stay (p < 0.0001). Donors who underwent DL used an average of 60.12 ± 5.0 mg of morphine, which was significantly less than that used by patients in the LDN (93.2 mg, p < 0.0001) and FL (111.82 mg, p < 0.001) groups. Mean serum creatinine of recipients at day 1 post-op was the highest in the FL group (p < 0.0001 FL vs. LDN, p < 0.001 FL vs. DL), but there were no significant differences between the three groups at 2 weeks, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-operation (p > 0.45). Although a lower pain experience of LDN was not indicated, the use of LDN should be favoured over DL and FL as it is associated with fewer complications, and shorter length of stay. Of note, DL appears to be associated with higher complications and is likely not a preferred option for donor nephrectomy.
doi_str_mv 10.5489/cuaj.266
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3650804</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A327700771</galeid><sourcerecordid>A327700771</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-15c03cc307656e56a13345f55eb0605e9482cda80510e3da38f55b748b9489c63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0lFr1TAUB_AiDjen4CeQ4kAc2GvSNEnrgzCGboOLPqjPIU1P781Mk65ph_fbe8qu4xZGH1LO-eUPPT1J8oaSFS_K6pOZ9O0qF-JZckKrnGQ0p8Xz-Z3STBSSHCcvY7wlRGBFvkiOcyYk5ZSeJLDWvR5CNKHffUybMETtUjd1dRhDt0u1b9LWaf8ntd7YaINPnb0HhD4MqYd-O4CZ5efUhA6TbEQS2j0I04hliK-So1a7CK_352ny-9vXX5fX2frH1c3lxTozRSXHjHJDmDGMSMEFcKEpYwVvOYeaCMKhKsrcNLoknBJgjWYl9mpZlDV2KiPYafLlIbef6g4aA34ctFP9YDs97FTQVi073m7VJtwrJjgpSYEBH_YBQ7ibII6qs9GAwxFAmKKijFNBJK8Y0rMHutEOlPVtwEQzc3XBcikJkZKieveEMr29U4do9QTCp4HOmuChtVhfpJ4vLqAZ4e-40VOM6ubn96V9f2C3oN24jcFNI_7MuIT7bze4D3GA9nFulKh5zdS8ZgrXDOnbwzk_wv97xf4B-2DLYQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1351607593</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Laparoscopy, dorsal lumbotomy and flank incision live donor nephrectomy: comparison of donor outcomes</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Samarasekera, Dinesh ; Kim, David S H ; Wang, Rachel ; Yip, Gordon ; Tang, Steven S ; Nguan, Christopher</creator><creatorcontrib>Samarasekera, Dinesh ; Kim, David S H ; Wang, Rachel ; Yip, Gordon ; Tang, Steven S ; Nguan, Christopher</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[Flank incision (FL), dorsal lumbotomy (DL) and laparoscopic surgery have been effective approaches to donor nephrectomy. While laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become increasingly popular, there has yet to be a direct comparison of the three modalities. We performed a retrospective chart review of FL, DL and LDN operations between 2002 and 2010 within a single institution. Donor and recipient characteristics, as well as surgical outcomes, were assessed. There were 496 donor nephrectomy operations available for analyses. Patients in the LDN group had the lowest estimated blood loss, compared to the DL and FL groups (p < 0.001), lowest rate of complications (p < 0.01), and shortest hospital stay (p < 0.0001). Donors who underwent DL used an average of 60.12 ± 5.0 mg of morphine, which was significantly less than that used by patients in the LDN (93.2 mg, p < 0.0001) and FL (111.82 mg, p < 0.001) groups. Mean serum creatinine of recipients at day 1 post-op was the highest in the FL group (p < 0.0001 FL vs. LDN, p < 0.001 FL vs. DL), but there were no significant differences between the three groups at 2 weeks, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-operation (p > 0.45). Although a lower pain experience of LDN was not indicated, the use of LDN should be favoured over DL and FL as it is associated with fewer complications, and shorter length of stay. Of note, DL appears to be associated with higher complications and is likely not a preferred option for donor nephrectomy.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 1911-6470</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1920-1214</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.266</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23671511</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Canada: Canadian Urological Association</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Laparoscopic surgery ; Laparoscopy ; Methods ; Nephrectomy ; Original Research</subject><ispartof>Canadian Urological Association journal, 2013-02, Vol.7 (1-2), p.E69-E73</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 Canadian Urological Association</rights><rights>Copyright: © 2013 Canadian Urological Association or its licensors 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-15c03cc307656e56a13345f55eb0605e9482cda80510e3da38f55b748b9489c63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3650804/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3650804/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27903,27904,53770,53772</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23671511$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Samarasekera, Dinesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, David S H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yip, Gordon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tang, Steven S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguan, Christopher</creatorcontrib><title>Laparoscopy, dorsal lumbotomy and flank incision live donor nephrectomy: comparison of donor outcomes</title><title>Canadian Urological Association journal</title><addtitle>Can Urol Assoc J</addtitle><description><![CDATA[Flank incision (FL), dorsal lumbotomy (DL) and laparoscopic surgery have been effective approaches to donor nephrectomy. While laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become increasingly popular, there has yet to be a direct comparison of the three modalities. We performed a retrospective chart review of FL, DL and LDN operations between 2002 and 2010 within a single institution. Donor and recipient characteristics, as well as surgical outcomes, were assessed. There were 496 donor nephrectomy operations available for analyses. Patients in the LDN group had the lowest estimated blood loss, compared to the DL and FL groups (p < 0.001), lowest rate of complications (p < 0.01), and shortest hospital stay (p < 0.0001). Donors who underwent DL used an average of 60.12 ± 5.0 mg of morphine, which was significantly less than that used by patients in the LDN (93.2 mg, p < 0.0001) and FL (111.82 mg, p < 0.001) groups. Mean serum creatinine of recipients at day 1 post-op was the highest in the FL group (p < 0.0001 FL vs. LDN, p < 0.001 FL vs. DL), but there were no significant differences between the three groups at 2 weeks, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-operation (p > 0.45). Although a lower pain experience of LDN was not indicated, the use of LDN should be favoured over DL and FL as it is associated with fewer complications, and shorter length of stay. Of note, DL appears to be associated with higher complications and is likely not a preferred option for donor nephrectomy.]]></description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Laparoscopic surgery</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Nephrectomy</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><issn>1911-6470</issn><issn>1920-1214</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpt0lFr1TAUB_AiDjen4CeQ4kAc2GvSNEnrgzCGboOLPqjPIU1P781Mk65ph_fbe8qu4xZGH1LO-eUPPT1J8oaSFS_K6pOZ9O0qF-JZckKrnGQ0p8Xz-Z3STBSSHCcvY7wlRGBFvkiOcyYk5ZSeJLDWvR5CNKHffUybMETtUjd1dRhDt0u1b9LWaf8ntd7YaINPnb0HhD4MqYd-O4CZ5efUhA6TbEQS2j0I04hliK-So1a7CK_352ny-9vXX5fX2frH1c3lxTozRSXHjHJDmDGMSMEFcKEpYwVvOYeaCMKhKsrcNLoknBJgjWYl9mpZlDV2KiPYafLlIbef6g4aA34ctFP9YDs97FTQVi073m7VJtwrJjgpSYEBH_YBQ7ibII6qs9GAwxFAmKKijFNBJK8Y0rMHutEOlPVtwEQzc3XBcikJkZKieveEMr29U4do9QTCp4HOmuChtVhfpJ4vLqAZ4e-40VOM6ubn96V9f2C3oN24jcFNI_7MuIT7bze4D3GA9nFulKh5zdS8ZgrXDOnbwzk_wv97xf4B-2DLYQ</recordid><startdate>20130201</startdate><enddate>20130201</enddate><creator>Samarasekera, Dinesh</creator><creator>Kim, David S H</creator><creator>Wang, Rachel</creator><creator>Yip, Gordon</creator><creator>Tang, Steven S</creator><creator>Nguan, Christopher</creator><general>Canadian Urological Association</general><general>Canadian Medical Association</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130201</creationdate><title>Laparoscopy, dorsal lumbotomy and flank incision live donor nephrectomy: comparison of donor outcomes</title><author>Samarasekera, Dinesh ; Kim, David S H ; Wang, Rachel ; Yip, Gordon ; Tang, Steven S ; Nguan, Christopher</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-15c03cc307656e56a13345f55eb0605e9482cda80510e3da38f55b748b9489c63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Laparoscopic surgery</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Nephrectomy</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Samarasekera, Dinesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, David S H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Rachel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yip, Gordon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tang, Steven S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguan, Christopher</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Canadian Urological Association journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Samarasekera, Dinesh</au><au>Kim, David S H</au><au>Wang, Rachel</au><au>Yip, Gordon</au><au>Tang, Steven S</au><au>Nguan, Christopher</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Laparoscopy, dorsal lumbotomy and flank incision live donor nephrectomy: comparison of donor outcomes</atitle><jtitle>Canadian Urological Association journal</jtitle><addtitle>Can Urol Assoc J</addtitle><date>2013-02-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>1-2</issue><spage>E69</spage><epage>E73</epage><pages>E69-E73</pages><issn>1911-6470</issn><eissn>1920-1214</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[Flank incision (FL), dorsal lumbotomy (DL) and laparoscopic surgery have been effective approaches to donor nephrectomy. While laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has become increasingly popular, there has yet to be a direct comparison of the three modalities. We performed a retrospective chart review of FL, DL and LDN operations between 2002 and 2010 within a single institution. Donor and recipient characteristics, as well as surgical outcomes, were assessed. There were 496 donor nephrectomy operations available for analyses. Patients in the LDN group had the lowest estimated blood loss, compared to the DL and FL groups (p < 0.001), lowest rate of complications (p < 0.01), and shortest hospital stay (p < 0.0001). Donors who underwent DL used an average of 60.12 ± 5.0 mg of morphine, which was significantly less than that used by patients in the LDN (93.2 mg, p < 0.0001) and FL (111.82 mg, p < 0.001) groups. Mean serum creatinine of recipients at day 1 post-op was the highest in the FL group (p < 0.0001 FL vs. LDN, p < 0.001 FL vs. DL), but there were no significant differences between the three groups at 2 weeks, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-operation (p > 0.45). Although a lower pain experience of LDN was not indicated, the use of LDN should be favoured over DL and FL as it is associated with fewer complications, and shorter length of stay. Of note, DL appears to be associated with higher complications and is likely not a preferred option for donor nephrectomy.]]></abstract><cop>Canada</cop><pub>Canadian Urological Association</pub><pmid>23671511</pmid><doi>10.5489/cuaj.266</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1911-6470
ispartof Canadian Urological Association journal, 2013-02, Vol.7 (1-2), p.E69-E73
issn 1911-6470
1920-1214
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3650804
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central
subjects Analysis
Laparoscopic surgery
Laparoscopy
Methods
Nephrectomy
Original Research
title Laparoscopy, dorsal lumbotomy and flank incision live donor nephrectomy: comparison of donor outcomes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T09%3A44%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Laparoscopy,%20dorsal%20lumbotomy%20and%20flank%20incision%20live%20donor%20nephrectomy:%20comparison%20of%20donor%20outcomes&rft.jtitle=Canadian%20Urological%20Association%20journal&rft.au=Samarasekera,%20Dinesh&rft.date=2013-02-01&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=1-2&rft.spage=E69&rft.epage=E73&rft.pages=E69-E73&rft.issn=1911-6470&rft.eissn=1920-1214&rft_id=info:doi/10.5489/cuaj.266&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA327700771%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1351607593&rft_id=info:pmid/23671511&rft_galeid=A327700771&rfr_iscdi=true