Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Living-Donor Nephrectomy Versus Open Surgery: Evaluation of Surgical Trauma and Late Graft Function in 82 Patients

Cost-effectiveness of four living-donor nephrectomy techniques from a hospital perspective

BACKGROUND

In Europe, transplantation centres use different nephrectomy techniques: open surgery, and standard, hand-assisted and robot-assisted laparoscopies. Few studies have analysed the disparity in costs and clinical outcomes between techniques. Since donors are healthy patients expecting minimum pain and fast recovery, this study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of four nephrectomy techniques focusing on early surgical outcomes, an essential in the donation act.

METHODS

A micro-costing approach was used to estimate the cost of implementation from a hospital perspective. Estimates took into account sterilization costs for multiple-use equipment, costs for purchasing single-use equipment, staff and analgesics. The study recruited donors in 20 centres in France. Quality of life by EuroQol-5D was assessed preoperatively, and 4 and 90 days post-operatively. Two effectiveness indicators were built: quality-of-life recovery and post-operative pain days averted (PPDA). The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02830568, on 10 June 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 264 donors were included; they underwent open surgery (n = 65), and standard (n = 65), hand-assisted (n = 65) and robot-assisted laparoscopies (n = 69). Use of the nephrectomy techniques differed greatly in cost of implementation and immediate post-operative outcomes but not in clinical outcomes at 90 days. At 4 days, hand-assisted laparoscopy provided the lowest cost per quality-of-life recovery unit of effectiveness (%) and PPDA (days) (€2056/40.1%/2.3 days, respectively). Robot-assisted laparoscopy was associated with the best post-operative outcomes but with the highest cost (€3430/59.1%/2.6 days).

CONCLUSION

Hand-assisted, standard and robot-assisted laparoscopies are cost-effective techniques compared with open surgery. Hand-assisted surgery is the most cost-effective procedure. Robot-assisted surgery requires more healthcare resource use but enables the best clinical outcome.

Comparison of Surgical Techniques in Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Background

The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate surgical techniques used for living donor nephrectomy (LDN).

Material/Methods

We performed a meta-analysis to compare 4 surgical techniques: open LDN (OLDN), laparoscopic LDN (LLDN), hand-assisted LLDN (HALLDN), and robot-assisted LLDN (RLDN).

Results

No significant differences were found among these surgical techniques in terms of BMI, donor postoperative complications, 1-year graft survival, and DGF. Compared to the OLDN, the other 3 surgical techniques preferred to harvest the left kidney. When the right kidney was chosen as a donor, OLDN was the first-choice surgical technique. EBL was significantly lower in the HALLDN, LLDN, and RLDN groups when compared to the OLDN group. However, operative time and WIT were significantly shorter in the OLDN group. The RLDN group had an increased rate of donor intraoperative complications and a significantly lower VAS on day 1. The OLDN group required more morphine intake than the LLDN group. The length of hospital stay was significantly longer and AR was significantly higher in the OLDN group than in the LLDN and HALLDN groups.

Conclusions

There are no significant differences in donor postoperative complications, recipient DGF, and graft survival among the 4 surgical techniques. OLDN reduces WIT and operation time, but increases EBL and AR. RLDN and LLDN reduce the length of hospital stay, morphine intake, and VAS, and thus accelerate recovery. However, RLDN is associated with increased intraoperative complications.

Evaluation of serum cytokine release in response to hand-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery in a porcine model

BACKGROUND

Although the immunologic benefits of laparoscopic surgery have been established, effects from hand-assisted (HA) surgery have not been investigated thoroughly. We hypothesized that the HA approach maintains the immunologic advantage of laparoscopic surgery compared with the open (O) approach.

METHODS

Six O, HA, and laparoscopic (L) transabdominal left nephrectomies were performed on pigs. Blood samples were taken preoperatively, perioperatively, and postoperatively, and serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein levels were measured.

RESULTS

At 24 hours after surgery, interleukin-6 levels were significantly higher in the O group vs the HA and L groups (82.2 vs 37.5 and 29.9 pg/mL, respectively; P < .05). Similar trends were seen at all time periods for both IL-6 and C-reactive protein. No significant differences in postoperative cytokine levels were detected between the HA and L groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The HA approach mimics the immunologic effects of laparoscopic surgery. These data suggest that the HA technique resulted in a reduced systemic immune activation in the early perioperative period when compared with open surgery. In addition to clinical benefits of minimal access, the HA approach also may afford patients an immunologic advantage over laparotomy.