Ex vivo normothermic perfusion (EVNP) technology is a promising means of organ preservation, assessment, and preconditioning prior to kidney transplantation, which has been pioneered by a single group. We describe the challenges of setting up clinical EVNP programs in 2 new centers, as well as early patient outcomes. Governance, training, and logistical pathways are described. In order to demonstrate safety and proficiency in this new technique, early patient outcomes are also described. Patient outcomes included the incidence of primary nonfunction, delayed graft function, graft and patient survival at 1 year. Contralateral kidneys undergoing static cold storage alone were used as a comparator group. Between March 2016 and July 2017, EVNP was performed on 14 kidneys from 12 donors (11 kidneys in center 1, 3 kidneys in center 2). Of the 14 kidneys that underwent EVNP, 12 organs were implanted into 10 recipients. Two pairs of kidneys were implanted as dual grafts and 1 kidney was implanted simultaneously with a pancreas. The remaining 7 kidneys were transplanted as single allografts. Seven pairs of kidneys were available for paired analysis comparing EVNP versus static cold storage. Graft and patient outcomes were comparable between the 2 preservation techniques. The introduction of a clinical EVNP service requires a careful multimodal approach, drawing on the expertise of specialists in transplantation, hematology, and microbiology. Both new clinical EVNP programs demonstrated proficiency and safety when a structured dissemination process was followed.

Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) offers key benefits for patients that have been demonstrated in several studies. A barrier to the wider uptake of RAKT is surgical skill acquisition. This is exacerbated by the challenges of modern surgery with reduced surgical training time, patient safety concerns and financial pressures. Simulation is a well-established method of developing surgical skill in a safe and controlled environment away from the patient. We have developed a 3D printed simulation model for the key step of the kidney transplant operation which is the vascular anastomosis. The model is anatomically accurate, based on the CT scans of patients and it incorporates deceased donor vascular tissue. Crucially, it was developed to be used in the robotic operating theatre with the operating robot to enhance its fidelity. It is portable and relatively inexpensive when compared with other forms of simulation such as virtual reality or animal lab training. It thus has the potential of being more accessible as a training tool for the safe acquisition of RAKT specific skills. We demonstrate this model here.

No abstract

Introduction: Robotic surgery has been increasingly used in fashioning various surgical anastomoses. Our aim was to collect and analyze outcomes related to anastomoses performed using a robotic approach and compare them with those done using laparoscopic or open approaches through meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic review was conducted for articles comparing robotic with laparoscopic and/or open operations (colectomy, low anterior resection, gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), pancreaticoduodenectomy, radical cystectomy, pyeloplasty, radical prostatectomy, renal transplant) published up to June 2019 searching Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Clinical Trials and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies containing information about outcomes related to hand-sewn anastomoses were included for meta-analysis. Studies with stapled anastomoses or without relevant information about the anastomotic technique were excluded. We also excluded studies in which the anastomoses were performed extracorporeally in laparoscopic or robotic operations. Results: We included 83 studies referring to the aforementioned operations (4 randomized controlled and 79 non-randomized, 10 prospective and 69 retrospective) apart from colectomy and low anterior resection. Anastomoses done using robotic instruments provided similar results to those done using laparoscopic or open approach in regards to anastomotic leak or stricture. However, there were lower rates of stenosis in robotic than in laparoscopic RYGB (p=0.01) and in robotic than in open radical prostatectomy (p<0.00001). Moreover, all anastomoses needed more time to be performed using the robotic rather than the open approach in renal transplant (p≤0.001). Conclusion: Robotic anastomoses provide equal outcomes with laparoscopic and open ones in most operations, with a few notable exceptions.