Right laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a single institution experience

Laparoscopic Right Donor Nephrectomy: A Two-Center Comparative Study

Introduction As the field of laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN) has progressed over the years, there has been a growing emphasis on optimizing surgical techniques and outcomes to ensure the safety and well-being of living kidney donors. The early experiences with right LLDN, marked by challenges and concerns such as high conversion rates to open surgery and early graft loss due to technical reasons, prompted a reevaluation of the approach toward right-sided donor nephrectomies. In this article, we aim to compare the safety and efficacy of right LLDN to left LLDN performed in our centers and to provide valuable insights that can ultimately enhance patient outcomes and ensure the well-being of living organ donors. Methods Between January 2018 and January 2022, we conducted 16 cases of right LLDN and compared them with 134 cases of left LLDN procedures done in the Kingdom of Bahrain and Jordan over the same time period. We analyzed differences in donor age, sex, operative time, warm ischemia time (WIT), graft function, complications, and conversion to open technique. Patient data and surgical outcomes were extracted from medical records and surgical databases. Statistical analysis was conducted to identify significant differences between the two groups. Categorical variables such as complications and safety outcomes were compared using chi-square tests and logistic regression analysis. The primary outcomes of interest included safety metrics such as complication rates, vascular complications, graft loss, and postoperative serum creatinine levels for the recipients. Results Our study showed similar demographics in both groups. However, the operative time was shorter for the left LLDN, with 81 minutes compared to 96 minutes for the right. Warm ischemia times (WITs) were comparable at 4.5 minutes for the left and 5.2 minutes for the right. There was less incidence of delayed graft function on the left side (none in the left group compared to one case in the right group). Both groups had similar six-month graft function in terms of serum creatinine levels (0.98 mg/dL for the left and 1.2 mg/dL for the right), hospital stays (2.5 days for the left and 2.8 days for the right), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (90 mL for the left and 50 mL for the right). Additionally, no blood transfusions were required in either group, but there was one case of conversion to open surgery in the right LLDN group. Conclusion Our data confirm the safety and efficacy of the right LLDN, consistent with the current literature. This increases the cumulative evidence supporting the use of laparoscopic retrieval on the right side when indicated.

Comparing outcomes in right versus left kidney transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Transplantation of right kidneys can pose technical challenges due to the short right renal vein. Whether this results in inferior outcomes remains controversial.

METHOD

Healthcare Database Advanced Search (HDAS) was used to identify relevant studies. Two authors independently reviewed each study. Statistical analyses were performed using random effects models and results expressed as HR or relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals. Subgroup analyses were performed in kidneys from deceased donors (DD) and living donors (LD).

RESULTS

A total of 35 studies (257,429 participants) were identified. Both deceased and living donor right kidneys were at increased risk of delayed graft function (DGF; RR = 1.12[1.06-1.18] and RR = 1.33[1.21-1.46] respectively; both p < .0001). In absolute terms, for each 100 kidney pairs of DD kidneys transplanted there are 2.72 (1.67-3.78, p < .00001) excess episodes of DGF in right kidneys. Graft thromboses and graft loss due to technical failure was also significantly more likely in right kidneys, in both DD and LD settings. There was no evidence that laterality alters long term graft survival in LD or DD.

CONCLUSION

Right kidneys have inferior early outcomes, with higher rates of DGF, technical failure and graft thrombosis. However, these differences are small in absolute terms, and long-term graft survival is equivalent.

Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy offers more liberal use of right kidneys: lessons learned from 565 cases - a retrospective single-center study

The introduction of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy caused a shift toward' left donor nephrectomy. Some centers report a significantly low rate of endoscopic right donor nephrectomy. Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP-DN) was introduced as a novel surgical technique, which aims to avoid intra-abdominal complications. It was also reported to provide technical advantages for right-sided DN. In this retrospective single-center study, we evaluated the impact of HARP-DN technique on utilization of right-sided DNs. After the implementation of HARP-DN on February 2009, a total of 565 DNs were performed until December 2015. The introduction of HARP-DN technique resulted in an immediate increase in the utilization of right kidneys from 6.1% to an average of 19.6% annually. The donors 'outcome was similar to the left-sided and right-sided DN groups, excluding the increased incidence of incisional hernias in left kidney donors. None of the donors developed intra-abdominal complications. In conclusion, the implementation of HARP technique significantly increased the use of right-sided DNs, which enables a more liberal use of donors in LDKT.

Perioperative Events and Complications in Minimally Invasive Live Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy has become a fully implemented and accepted procedure. Donors have to be well educated about all risks and details during the informed consent process. For this to be successful, more information regarding short-term outcome is necessary.

METHODS

A literature search was performed; all studies discussing short-term complications after minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy were included. Outcomes evaluated were intraoperative and postoperative complications, conversions, operative and warm ischemia times, blood loss, length of hospital stay, pain score, convalescence, quality of life, and costs.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety articles were included in the systematic review, 41 in the meta-analysis. Conversion rate was 1.1%. Intraoperative complication rate was 2.3%, mainly bleeding (1.5%). Postoperative complications occurred in 7.3% of donors, including infectious complications (2.6%), of which mainly wound infection (1.6%) and bleeding (1.0%). Reported mortality rate was 0.01%. All minimally invasive techniques were comparable with regard to complication or conversion rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The used techniques for minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy are safe and associated with low complication rates and minimal risk of mortality. These data may be helpful to develop a standardized, donor-tailored informed consent procedure for live donor nephrectomy.

Is the Reluctance for the Implantation of Right Donor Kidneys Justified?

Background

The lengths of right renal veins are shorter when compared to their left counterparts. Since the implantation of kidneys with short renal veins is considered more challenging, many surgeons prefer left kidneys for transplantation. Therefore, our hypothesis is that the implantation of right kidneys from living and deceased donors is associated with more technical graft failures as compared to left kidneys.

Methods

Two consecutive cohorts of adult renal allograft recipients of living (n = 4.372) and deceased (n = 5.346) donor kidneys between January 1, 2000 and January 1, 2013 were analyzed. Data were obtained from the prospectively maintained electronic database of the Dutch Organ Transplant Registry. Technical graft failure was defined as failure of the renal allograft within 10 days after renal transplantation without signs of acute rejection.

Results

In the living donor kidney transplantation cohort, the implantation of right donor kidneys was associated with a higher incidence of technical graft failure (multivariate analysis p = 0.03). For recipients of deceased donor kidneys, the implantation of right kidneys was not significantly associated with technique-related graft failure (multivariate analysis p = 0.16).

Conclusions

Our data show that the implantation of right kidneys from living donors is associated with a higher incidence of technique-related graft failure as compared to left kidneys.

Evaluation of cadaveric renal vein lengths and their extension loss with three types of ligature and section

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The right kidney has been less frequently used in live donor nephrectomy, because of the shorter length of the right renal vein (RRV) that is associated with technical difficulties and higher rates of venous thrombosis. In live open donor or deceased donor transplant nephrectomy, an additional cuff of the inferior vena cava is usually removed, but this is a more difficult and risky maneuver in laparoscopic nephrectomy. For this reason, laparoscopic right nephrectomy (LRN) for renal transplantation (RT) is not frequently performed in most medical institutions. We evaluate the difference between RRV and left renal vein (LRV) lengths in cadavers, as harvested for RT by three clamping methods. Our objective was to obtain information that could clarify when LRN for RT should be encouraged or avoided with regard to conventional surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety adult fresh unfrozen cadavers were randomly divided into three groups of 30, according to the clamping device used: Satinsky, stapler, and Hem-o-lok clip. The abdominal viscera were removed through a median xyphopubic incision, and the veins were measured on the bench. Two lateral limits were used: The renal hilum and the tangential line of the renal poles. As for medial limits, the inferior vena cava or the laparoscopic clipping device on the RRV were used on the right side, while on the LRV, the medial border of the emergence of the adrenal vein was considered. After section of the renal vein, a slight traction of the extremity was applied for the measurement. All measurements were obtained three times using a metallic millimetric ruler, and the arithmetic mean was considered. The chi-square, one-way analysis of variance, and paired t tests were used for statistical analysis. Statistical significance was accepted at P <or= 0.05.

RESULTS

The groups of cadavers were homogeneous in demographic characteristics. Regardless of the clamping method and considering the useful length of the LRV, the RRV was statistically smaller. The evaluation of the vein length did not depend on the lateral limit considered. Independent of the clamping method, on both sides, the lengths after the vein section were larger than before the section, a fact attributed to traction. Use of a stapler and a single Hem-o-lok presented the same waste of vein length on the right side. On average, the RRV was 13.7% shorter than the LRV.

CONCLUSIONS

With the wide acceptance of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy, the length difference between the veins of both kidneys is an important issue, and the right kidney is therefore used less than the left, compared with conventional surgery. This article represents the first step to quantify the anatomic length of renal veins in different situations. Certainly, more imagenologic or surgical studies should be carried out before decisions can be made for better selection of patients for LRN.

A comparison of hand-assisted and pure laparoscopic techniques in live donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE

To compare hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy techniques in live donor nephrectomy.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included all patients submitted to hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy between May 2002 and December 2007. The operative data and post-operative courses were reviewed. Information was collected on the operative time, warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, intra-operative complications, time to first oral intake, length of hospital stay, and post-operative complications. The data were analyzed using Student's t -tests and Fisher exact tests as appropriate, with statistical significance defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The means of the operative duration, warm ischemia time and intra-operative bleeding were 83 min, 3.6 min and 130.9 cc, respectively, for hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, and 78.4 min, 2.5 min and 98.9 cc, respectively, for pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (p=0.29, p<0.0001 and p=0.08, respectively). Intra-operative complications occurred in 6% of patients submitted to hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and in 4.5% of those submitted to pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (p=0.68). Only one patient from each group required conversion to open surgery; one person receiving hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy had bleeding and one person receiving pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy had low carbon dioxide levels during the warm ischemia period. Compared with patients receiving hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, patients submitted to pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy were able to take their first meal earlier (12.5 vs. 9.2 hours, p=0.046), were discharged home sooner (2.8 vs. 1.4 days, p<0.0001) and had fewer post-operative complications (7.5% vs. 0.6%, p=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Pure laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy had some advantages over hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in terms of the warm ischemia time, time to first oral intake, length of hospital stay, and post-operative donor complications.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (right-sided approach): experience obtained from 31 cases

INTRODUCTION

The removal of a donor kidney by laparoscopic nephrectomy is a safe method that is widely used, mainly in left donor nephrectomy. However, for right donor nephrectomy where the right renal vein is short, open surgery has been more frequently described in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to describe our experience with 31 renal transplantations using 2 different techniques in right donor nephrectomy.

METHOD

In the period ranging from February 2002 to June 2005, we performed, 31 hand-assisted laparoscopic right donor nephrectomies. Twenty-five were performed by the method where the assistant used his hand to assist the surgery and 6 were by the laparoscopic method assisted by the first surgeon.

RESULTS

The right donor nephrectomies assisted either by the hand of the assistant or the surgeon showed similar results. All recipients displayed diuresis in the immediate postoperative period. The serum creatinine level at 1 week after transplantation was 1.90 mg/dL (+/-1.55).

CONCLUSION

Although the handling techniques are similar, we concluded that laparoscopic nephrectomy assisted by the surgeon is more adequate for right kidney extraction. It can be performed either by a resident doctor or a surgeon of the transplantation team, with or without experience in nephrectomy for transplantation.

Obtaining Cuff of Inferior Vena Cava by Use of the Endo-TA Stapler in Retroperitoneoscopic Right-Side Donor Nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To determine the feasibility of obtaining an adequate cuff of the inferior vena cava (IVC) for vascular anastomosis during retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy.

METHODS

Between September 2004 and May 2005, a total 100 retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed. Fifteen cases were performed on the right side. The Endo-TA stapler was used to obtain the cuff of IVC in all cases of right-side donor nephrectomy.

RESULTS

Mean warm ischemia time was 4.9 minutes (range, 2.96 to 8.0 minutes). Mean length of the cuff of IVC was 4 mm (range, 3 to 6 mm) at the upper end and 6 mm (range, 4 to 8 mm) at the lower end of the vein. All grafts functioned immediately, and there was one graft loss due to vascular rejection.

CONCLUSIONS

Control of the renal vein by use of the Endo-TA stapler during retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy helps in obtaining a good vascular cuff of the IVC.

Laparoscopic Live Donor Right Nephrectomy: A New Technique to Maximize the Length of the Renal Vein Using a Modified Endo GIA Stapler

OBJECTIVES

To report the utilization of a modified Endo GIA vascular stapler to obtain the full length of the renal vein during transperitoneal laparoscopic live donor right nephrectomy.

METHODS

We used a modified Endo GIA stapler, in which the triple staggered rows of staples were removed from the kidney donor side to obtain the full length of the right renal vein. This technique has currently been used in nine consecutive transperitoneal laparoscopic right donor nephrectomies.

RESULTS

With this technique, the entire right renal vein length was harvested in all cases, without vascular complications. Mean renal warm ischemia time from clamping of the renal vessels to cold perfusion was 135s, and mean receptor postoperative glomerular filtration rate after 30 d was 67.3 ml/min. There were no graft losses.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel technique for laparoscopic live donor right nephrectomy is described. It allows harvesting the full length of the right renal vein in a safe and feasible way without compromising warm ischemia time.

Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Single-Center Experience in Egypt With 400 Consecutive Cases

INTRODUCTION

In this study, we present our experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and evaluate the outcomes of donors and recipients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between March 2003 and August 2006, 400 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed in our institution. Donors were evaluated for renal vasculature using computed tomography angiography. We used the left kidney in 329 donors and the right kidney in 71. Donor surgeries were done transperitoneally using three trocars on the left side and four trocars on the right side. Kidneys were extracted manually through a 7-cm Pfanenstiel incision.

RESULTS

All cases were completed laparoscopically. Mean operative time was 117 +/- 34 minutes. Mean blood loss was 56 +/- 28 mL. None of the donors required a blood transfusion. Mean warm ischemia time was 2.6 +/- 0.4 minutes. The mean renal artery length was 3.1 +/- 0.4 cm; the mean renal vein length was 2.4 +/- 1.2 cm. Mean hospital stay was 2.1 days. No donor required readmission. Kidneys were transplanted successfully and the mean recipient creatinine on discharge was 1.2 +/- 0.6 mg/dL. One patient had a renal artery thrombosis on postoperative day 2. Another patient with double renal arteries had thrombosis of the smaller artery just after surgery. Acute tubular necrosis was seen in 17 patients, four of whom required dialysis. Kidney function recovered thereafter in all acute tubular necrosis cases.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery is a minimally invasive approach for living donor nephrectomy with good functional outcomes. The donor benefits from lesser morbidity without compromising the anatomic or physiological outcome of the nephrectomized kidney.

Meta-analysis of the complications of laparoscopic renal surgery: comparison of procedures and techniques

PURPOSE

We performed a meta-analysis of the literature to define the current expectations of complications during laparoscopic renal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

References were searched in the MEDLINE database from 1995 to 2004 using the terms complications and laparoscopic nephrectomy. Inclusion criteria were any series with greater than 20 cases, patient age older than 16 years and any complications listed for certain procedures, including laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, HA laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, LPN, HALPN, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, HA laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, laparoscopic simple nephrectomy, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy. A data extraction form was created to categorize major or minor complications. A 5 member panel adhered to the strict criteria and extracted data from articles that met inclusion criteria. Data were entered into a spreadsheet and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Initial review identified 73 of 405 references that were acceptable for retrieval and data extraction, of which 56 met inclusion criteria. The overall major and minor complication rates of laparoscopic renal surgery were 9.5% and 1.9%, respectively. There was a significant difference between the major complication rates of LPN and HALPN (21.0% vs 3.3%, p <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that patients who undergo laparoscopic renal surgery may have an overall major complication rate of 9.5%. The highest major complication rate is associated with technically challenging LPN (21%). There appears to be a significantly higher wound complication rate associated with HA surgery in comparison to that of standard laparoscopy (1.9% vs 0.2%, p <0.05).

Hand-assisted right laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy has acquired an important role in the era of minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscopic harvesting of the right kidney is technically more challenging than that of the left kidney because of the short right renal vein and the need to retract the liver away from the right kidney. The aim of this article is to report our experience with right laparoscopic live donor nephrectomies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 28 patients who underwent right laparoscopic donor nephrectomies at our service. Operative data and postoperative outcomes were collected, including surgical time, estimated blood loss, warm ischemia time, length of hospital stay, conversion to laparotomy and complications.

RESULTS

The procedure was performed successfully in all 28 patients. The mean operative time was 83.8 minutes (range 45 to 180 minutes), with an estimated blood loss of 111.4 mL (range 40 to 350 mL) and warm ischemia time of 3 minutes (range 1.5 to 8 minutes). No donor needed conversion to open surgery and all kidneys showed immediate function after implantation. The average time to initial fluid intake was 12 hours (range 8 to 24 hours). Two cases of postoperative ileus and a case of hematoma on the hand-port site were observed. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 3 days (range 1 to 7 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data confirm the safety and feasibility of right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and we believe that the right kidney should not be avoided for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy when indicated.

Laparoscopic Right Donor Nephrectomy: Is There a Right Way?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There is a continuing reluctance among transplant surgeons to procure a right-kidney allograft laparoscopically. We describe our experience with right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RLDN) by three techniques.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all seven RLDNs performed at our center from January 2002 to June 2005. The technique used in a particular case depended on the anatomy of the renal vasculature and included transperitoneal (N = 1), retroperitoneoscopic (N = 4), and retroperitoneoscopy-assisted approaches without the use of hand port or other assist devices (N = 2). No stapling or manual-assist devices were used in the last four cases for division of the renal vessels.

RESULTS

The mean blood loss, operating time, hospital stay, and serum creatinine concentration on day 7 were 94.3 +/- 46.9 mL (SD), 212.8 +/- 66 minutes, 4.9 +/- 1.9 days, and 1.1 +/- 0.2 mg/dL, respectively. The overall warm ischemia time was 217 +/- 116 seconds. Our preferred technique currently is to go for a total retroperitoneoscopic approach to the right kidney initially. If the renal vein appears short, we make a small subcostal incision to retrieve the kidney openly at this stage (retroperitoneoscopy-assisted approach) with minimal risks to the donor and recipient.

CONCLUSIONS

Retroperitoneoscopic RLDN performed without hand-assist or stapling devices is safe and cost-effective and yields kidneys with excellent function. Rather than have a fixed approach to RLDN, we suggest a choice depending on the length of the renal vessels observed during surgery.

Outcome of right hand–assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy

OBJECTIVES

To compare the results of right and left hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy (HARDN) and assess the usefulness and feasibility of right HARDN.

METHODS

A total of 68 HARDNs performed from July 2001 to February 2005 in Akita University Medical Center were entered into this study. Of these, 12 cases were right-sided HARDN. The reasons for selecting right HARDN were wandering right kidney in 4, multiple left renal arteries in 3, lower glomerular function presenting in the right kidney in 2 patients, and left renal stone, right renal cyst, and right renal aneurysm in 1 patient each. We compared the perioperative and postoperative results of the 12 right-sided HARDNs with those of the 56 left HARDNs.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the two groups in the demographic data (ie, age, sex, number of renal arteries), except for the body mass index. None of the right HARDNs resulted in major complications or open conversion, but two left HARDNs required conversion to open surgery. No difference was found between the two groups regarding estimated blood loss, warm ischemia time, or time to oral intake, although the right HARDN group had a longer mean operative time. No significant differences were found in the recipient's postoperative graft function or in the frequency of delayed graft function.

CONCLUSIONS

Right HARDN provided almost similar perioperative and postoperative outcomes compared with those of left HARDN. Our results indicate that right HARDN is a choice for living donor nephrectomy because of its technical feasibility, safety, and minimal invasiveness, which are comparable to those of left HARDN.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is considered the gold standard for renal donation. In the hands of experienced laparoscopists it provides a safe and equally effective alternative to open nephrectomy, and recipient graft function has been shown to be equivalent regardless of the procurement method utilized. Complication rates and postoperative donor renal function are equivalent to that of open nephrectomy, whereas recovery time is significantly shorter and surgical scars more cosmetic with the laparoscopic approach.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in preoperative imaging and laparoscopic technique have enabled surgeons to broaden the patient population considered for donor nephrectomy. Improved three-dimensional imaging facilitates operative planning and intraoperative dissection, and the retroperitoneoscopic approach has decreased operative time. Acquisition of laparoscopic skills has also enabled surgeons to perform donor nephrectomies on kidneys that previously would have been considered less desirable for donation (e.g. right-sided or with anomalous vasculature).

SUMMARY

End-stage renal disease and the need for renal transplantation continue to be major medical concerns in the United States and worldwide. Advances in donor nephrectomy have reduced the demand for organs by increasing the potential organ pool while limiting risk to donors. As imaging and laparoscopic techniques continue to advance, it is anticipated that minimally invasive donor nephrectomy will continue to evolve. This review summarizes the developments to date.

Laparoscopic Right Donor Nephrectomy: A Large Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic procurement of right donor kidneys is frequently avoided or performed using hand-assist devices because of concerns regarding donor safety, adequate exposure, and vessel length. The present study describes the authors' large series of right donor nephrectomies performed laparoscopically without the use of hand ports or other manual assist devices.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively analyzed all right laparoscopic donor nephrectomies performed at their center from November 1, 1999, to February 20, 2004. Study variables included operative times, blood loss, hospital stay, graft function, and donor and recipient complications. Left donor nephrectomies performed during the same period served as controls.

RESULTS

Of 387 laparoscopic kidney procurements, 54 (14 %) were right nephrectomies. Blood loss, extraction times, length of stay, and overall complication rates were similar between right and left donor groups. The mean operative time in the right nephrectomy group was significantly shorter than in the left nephrectomy group (169 +/- 25 and 186 +/- 29 min, respectively; P = 0.003). Graft function 1 month after transplantation and the incidence of delayed graft function were similar in both groups. There was one graft loss caused by thrombosis in the left nephrectomy group; other graft-related complications in the recipients were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This large single-center experience demonstrates that laparoscopic right donor nephrectomy performed without hand-assist devices is safe and yields kidneys with excellent function. The authors conclude that selection of the appropriate kidney for donation using this approach can be based on the same criteria that have traditionally governed open donor nephrectomy.