Aim:We compare the outcome of three different methods of graft extraction after a laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.Materials and Methods:After a conventional five port laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, specimen was extracted through one of three approaches: 1. Iliac fossa (IF) incision and hand extraction, 2. Midline (MD) periumbilical with a lower polar fat stitch incorporating gonadal vein for traction while retrieval, and 3. Pfannensteil (PF) with Gel port extraction. Estimated blood loss, operating time, warm ischemia time, incision length, pain score, analgesic consumption, hospital stay, wound complications, graft complications and recipient creatinine at 6 weeks were analyzed.Results:Warm ischemia time was significantly reduced in PF group when compared to other groups. Length of the incision was less in the MD group compared to other groups. Wound complications were significantly less in PF group when compared to other groups. Graft extraction complications were significantly high in MD group compared to other two groups.Conclusion:Based on the results obtained, our current method of preference is by Pfannensteil incision. A controlled extraction with the use of a hand assist device would be best for donor safety and to avoid graft related complications.

Based on our initial experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with transvaginal extraction, we recommend this procedure for a premenopausal donor, with a BMI <30. Our initial cases demonstrate that transvaginal extraction is feasible and safe for the donors.

Background:Live donor nephrectomy has gained popularity on account of the laparoscopic technique, to overcome a small donor pool. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy requires a precise study of the vascular and morphological renal anatomy, as laparoscopy is technically challenging due to the limited field of vision. In-depth knowledge of the renal anatomy before a laparoscopic procedure is essential for a successful transplant. The left kidney is preferred over the right even in cases of multiple vessels because of the long renal vein, which requires precise preoperative vascular mapping. Helical computerized tomography (CT) angiography, with its axial, coronal, and 3D reconstruction, gives a better understanding of renal anatomy. There are instances where the helical CT findings are misleading and less informative in a small number of cases. This study highlights a case study of the helical CT findings compared with the intraoperative findings of 200 live donors, who underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, and the renal anatomy has been understood at the same time.Aims:1. To compare the helical CT findings on the operated side with the intraoperative findings. 2. To analyze the CT findingsMaterials and Methods:Two hundred cases of laparoscopic transperitoneal donor nephrectomy were included in this study.Statistical Method Used:Chi square test was the statistical test used to compare the findings between CT and the intraoperative data.Results:The axial, coronal, and 3D images of the CT findings were on par with the intraoperative findings in most of the cases. Incidental findings help in the better planning of surgery. Multiple vessels on the left side are preferred over the right sided normal anatomy; with not much technical difficulty with the aid of a helical CT. Male donors had more incidences of multiple vessels, gonadal vein, Retroaortic Renal Vein (RARV), lumbar vein, and duplication of ureter, compared to females. Furthermore, these variations are more in the left side donors. Ninety-two percent of the cases in this study are left-sided donors. The helical CT finding shows that renal vein variations are more on the right side.Conclusions:Helical CT is important in delineating the arterial, venous, and ureteral anatomy and can show the important incidental findings. Left renal donors and males have more variations in their renal anatomy. Technically challenging laparoscopic nephrectomy on the multiple-vessel-side donor is possible with the aid of helical CT. The importance of the CT in evaluating donor renal anatomy for a technically challenging laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is commendable.

No abstract

In the era of minimally invasive surgery, MFI technique could challenge the role of laparoscopic and robotic surgery in renal transplantation. Our study shows that the technique is successful in carefully selected patients with low BMI.