Third Prize: Randomized Trial of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy with and without Hand Assistance

Bargman, Vladislav; Sundaram, Chandru P.; Bernie, Jonathan E.; Goggins, William C.

doi:10.1089/end.2006.20.717

Cited by 69 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most important arguments for using hand assistance concerned reduction of the operating time, warm ischemia time, and increased safety and control. These arguments confirm that hand-assisted LDN is not only used during the learning phase of LDN but has also become a true alternative with similar outcomes (20). Our results confirm this because there was no relation between the use of hand assistance and years of experience or case volume.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Attitudes Among Surgeons Towards Live-Donor Nephrectomy

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Attitudes Among Surgeons Towards Live-Donor Nephrectomy

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10 Dividing their study into two halves, the group found that operative times decreased from 293 to 232 More recently, Bargman et al analysed 40 donor nephrectomies in a randomised control study, involving equal numbers undergoing lN and Hal. 13 With mean operative times of 200 and 219 minutes (p=0.02) for lN and Hal respectively, they demonstrated that lN can be quicker than Hal. Furthermore, there are reports of an increase in complications when using Hal, with a risk of wound complications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

One hand is better than two: conversion from pure laparoscopic to the hand-assisted approach during difficult nephrectomy

Mahesan

Choudhury

Khan

et al. 2011

annals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTIONThe incidence of conversion from a laparoscopic to an open approach during nephrectomy is reported at 6-8%. 1 Conversion to an open procedure may be necessary to control haemorrhage or allow progress in dissection but the well established benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) are obviously lost. Hand-assisted laparoscopy (HAL) also offers the benefits to the patient of MIS. We have used HAL to convert from the pure laparoscopic approach during difficult nephrectomies, rather than converting to traditional open surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS A review of our prospective database was carried out to identify any conversions from the pure laparoscopic approach during nephrectomy or nephroureterectomy for benign or malignant disease. RESULTS A total of 87 laparoscopic nephrectomies (LNs) were identified over a 3-year period. There were five conversions to the HAL approach (5.7%) and no conversions to open surgery. The reason for conversion was failure to progress in all five cases. Operative times averaged 190 minutes with blood loss of 180ml. Histology revealed xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis in four cases and renal cell carcinoma in one case. The median postoperative stay was 4 days. CONCLUSIONS Conversion to HAL during LN maintains the benefits of MIS in difficult nephrectomy and should be considered prior to converting to open surgery.

show abstract

“…This has been already reported in many studies including hands. 9,10 All the 16 kidneys harvested by laparoscopic method were transplanted successfully in the recipients with only 2 (12%) conversion to open due to bleeding from posterior lumbar vein where bleeding was controlled, but we found difficulty in repairing it laparoscopically. Conversion rate in SGPGI is 10.1%.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…We have compared our study with similar studies, where multiple factors were analysed for outcome of donors following laparoscopy and the graft function in recipients. 1,6,7,8,9 In our series, we have selected only a left side kidney for laparoscopic procedure which is easier technically because of long renal vein on left side. This has been already reported in many studies including hands.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcome of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Our Institutional Experience

Thiagarajan¹,

Balaji²,

Shaheen³

et al. 2016

jemds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Renal Transplantation has become established as the treatment of choice for patients with End Stage Renal Disease requiring renal replacement therapy. Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy is performed across a few centres across the country. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is advantageous in all aspect of donor surgery like lower operating time, less blood loss, lower post-operative pain, small surgical site scar and lesser requirement of analgesics. Though there is an increased warm ischaemia time, it has not impacted on the graft outcome. Our series also demonstrates the above benefit.

show abstract

Third Prize: Randomized Trial of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy with and without Hand Assistance

Abstract: Laparoscopic and hand-assisted donor nephrectomies have similar outcomes and postoperative pain. Both approaches are well tolerated with minimal complication rates and have similar impact on patients' quality of life.

Cited by 69 publications

References 16 publications

Attitudes Among Surgeons Towards Live-Donor Nephrectomy

Attitudes Among Surgeons Towards Live-Donor Nephrectomy

One hand is better than two: conversion from pure laparoscopic to the hand-assisted approach during difficult nephrectomy

Outcome of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Our Institutional Experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About