Single-incision robotic-assisted living donor nephrectomy: case report and description of surgical technique

Comparison of the iliac, vaginal and umbilical graft extraction in robot-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE

To compare different extractions routes for robot-assisted living donor nephrectomy in terms of post-operative pain and renal function recovery.

METHODS

Live donor kidney transplantation data from our institution were reviewed from November 2011 to March 2017. Postoperative pain was estimated using cumulative painkillers consumption. Variables were compared between the 3 groups with ANOVA for continuous data, χ2 test for categorial data. A survival analysis with Kaplan-Meier curve assessing time to transplant recipient nadir was performed to compare the renal function recovery.

RESULTS

Sixty-three RLDN were performed (23 iliac, 23 vaginal and 17 umbilical extractions). There was no significant difference between the three groups in terms of operative time, blood lost, warm ischemia time, cumulative painkiller consumption and renal function recovery time. Postoperative complications for Umbilical, Vaginal and Iliac were, respectively, of 0, 3 and 1. No major difference was found between the 3 groups beside a slightly longer hospital stay in the iliac group.

CONCLUSION

Iliac incision might impact post-operative pain with a moderate but significant longer hospital stay. Vaginal extraction is an option when cosmetic outcomes present a real demand. The three options appeared to be safe and should be discussed with the patient in regard of the surgeon experience.

Donor and Recipient Outcomes following Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review

Aims

We aimed to summarize available lines of evidence about intraoperative and postoperative donor outcomes following robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RALDN) as well as outcomes of graft and recipients.

Methods

A systematic review of PubMed/Medline, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases was performed in May 2018. The following search terms were combined: nephrectomy, robotic, and living donor. We included full papers that met the following criteria: original research; English language; human studies; enrolling patients undergoing RALDN.

Results

Eighteen studies involving 910 patients were included in the final analysis. Mean overall operative and warm ischemia times ranged from 139 to 306 minutes and from 1.5 to 5.8 minutes, respectively. Mean estimated blood loss varied from 30 to 146 mL and the incidence of intraoperative complications ranged from 0% to 6.7%. Conversion rate varied from 0% to 5%. The mean hospital length of stay varied from 1 to 5.8 days and incidence of early postoperative complications varied from 0% to 15.7%. No donor mortality was observed. The incidence of delayed graft function was reported in 7 cases. The one- and 10-year graft loss rates were 1% and 22%, respectively.

Conclusions

Based on preliminary data, RALDN appears as a safe and effective procedure.

Robot-Assisted Transplant Surgery - Vision or Reality? A Comprehensive Review

Minimally invasive surgery is standard procedure for many operations. Further refinements include the introduction of robotic surgery which is still an emerging field especially in laparoscopic surgery. Since the successful introduction of the da Vinci Robotic Surgical System, the robotic approach in organ transplantation has become of great interest in both the live donor organ retrieval and the recipient operation. Robotic surgery for kidney, liver, and pancreas transplantation is feasible. Over 700 donor nephrectomies and 100 kidney transplantations have been performed already, and robotic surgery is standard in a small number of pioneer centers; however, larger series and most importantly randomized controlled trials for the highest evidence are needed. Longer warm ischemia time and higher costs limit these procedures at the moment.

Novel surgical techniques, regenerative medicine, tissue engineering and innovative immunosuppression in kidney transplantation

On the 60th anniversary of the first successfully performed renal transplantation, we summarize the historical, current and potential future status of kidney transplantation. We discuss three different aspects with a potential significant influence on kidney transplantation progress: the development of surgical techniques, the influence of regenerative medicine and tissue engineering, and changes in immunosuppression. We evaluate the standard open surgical procedures with modern techniques and compare them to less invasive videoscopic as well as robotic techniques. The role of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine as a potential method for future kidney regeneration or replacement and the interesting search for novel solutions in the field of immunosuppression will be discussed. After 60 years since the first successfully performed kidney transplantation, we can conclude that the greatest achievements are associated with the development of surgical techniques and with planned systemic immunosuppression.

Robotic nephrectomy for living donation: surgical technique and literature systematic review

BACKGROUND

As compared with traditional laparoscopy, robotic-assisted surgery provides better EndoWrist instruments and three-dimensional visualization of the operative field. Studies published so far indicate that living donor nephrectomy using the robot-assisted technique is safe, feasible, and provides remarkable advantages for the patients.

METHODS

From 5 papers reporting detailed descriptions of surgical technique for robotic assisted nephrectomy (RAN) in living donor kidney transplantation, we have gathered information about the surgical techniques as well as about patients' intra- and postoperative outcome. Data from these articles were analyzed together with the data from our own experience (33 cases) so that the total number of analyzed cases was 292.

RESULTS

In the analyzed populations, no case of donor death occurred, and no case developed complication above grade 2 of Clavien score. Perioperative complications occurred in 37 of the 292 patients (12.6%). Accidental acute hemorrhage occurred in 5 of the 292 cases (1.7%). The average overall intraoperative blood loss was 67.8 mL (range 10 to 1,500). The average warm ischemia time was 3.5 minutes (range .58 to 7.6). Conversion to the open technique occurred in only 4 cases (1.3%). The average overall operative time was 192 minutes (range 60 to 400). The average length of the hospital stay was 2.7 days (range 1 to 10).

CONCLUSIONS

Safety and feasibility of RAN are pointed out in all the reviewed article, both as hand-assisted and as totally robotic technique. RAN appears to be significantly easier for the surgeons and the results are comparable with the ones obtained with the pure laparoscopic technique.

State of the art of robotic surgery in organ transplantation

Within the last two decades the application of minimally invasive surgical technologies has shown significant benefits when it comes to complex surgical procedures. Lower rates of complications and higher patient satisfaction are commonly reported. Until recently these benefits were inaccessible for patients with solid organ transplantation, because conventional laparoscopy was seen as nonapplicable in such technically demanding procedures. The introduction of the da Vinci Robotic Surgical System, with its inherent advantages, has expanded the ability to complete solid organ transplantation in a minimally invasive fashion. Robotic applications in kidney, pancreas, and liver transplantation have been reported. The initial results showed the viability of this technique in the field. The most extensive experience has been described in kidney transplantation. Over 700 donor nephrectomies and more than 70 renal transplants have been performed successfully with the robotic system. The proven advantage of the robotic technique, especially in obese kidney recipients, is a significantly lower rate of surgical site infection, which in these highly immunosuppressed patients is reflected in superior outcomes. The first results in pancreas transplantation and living donor hepatectomy are very promising; however, larger series are needed in order to address the value of the robotic surgery in these areas of solid organ transplantation.

Robotic trans-abdominal transplant nephrectomy for a failed renal allograft

Minimally invasive surgery for removal of a failed renal allograft has not previously been reported. Herein, we report the first robotic trans-abdominal transplant nephrectomy (TN). A 34-year-old male with Alport's syndrome lost function of his deceased donor allograft after 12 years and presented with fever, pain over his allograft and hematuria. The operation was performed intra-abdominally using the Da Vinci Robotic Surgical System with four trocars. The total operative time was 235 min and the estimated blood loss was less than 25 cm(3). There were no peri-operative complications observed and the patient was discharged to home less than 24 h postoperatively. The utilization of robotic technology facilitated the successful performance of a minimally invasive, trans-abdominal TN.

Minimally invasive donor nephrectomy: innovations

From open surgery to laparoscopic surgery, there has been an evolution in the surgical technique for live donor nephrectomy which goes beyond patient comfort. As a unique operation where the margin for error is nearly nil, and where the patient is essentially harmed for an altruistic goal, ensuring the best possible result is vital. Additionally, as the morbidity of the operation decreases, there is a theoretical increase in the donor pool. In this review, the latest techniques for minimally invasive live donor nephrectomy are covered, including new approaches such as laparoendoscopic single-site surgery, natural orifice surgery, and new tools such as robotics.

Can right-sided hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy be advocated above standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a randomized pilot study

Endoscopic techniques have contributed to early recovery and increased quality of life (QOL) of live kidney donors. However, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) may have its limitations, and hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP) has been introduced, mainly as a potentially safer alternative. In a randomized fashion, we explored the feasibility and potential benefits of HARP for right-sided donor nephrectomy in a referral center with longstanding expertise on the standard laparoscopic approach. Forty donors were randomly assigned to either LDN or HARP. Primary outcome was operating time, and secondary outcomes included QOL, complications, pain, morphine requirement, blood loss, warm ischemia time, and hospital stay. Follow-up time was 1 year. Skin-to-skin time did not significantly differ between both groups (162 vs. 158 min, P = 0.98). As compared to LDN, HARP resulted in a shorter warm ischemia time (2.8 vs. 3.9 min, P < 0.001) and increased blood loss (187 vs. 50 ml, P < 0.001). QOL, complication rate, pain, or hospital stay was not significantly different between the groups. Right-sided HARP is feasible but does not confer clear benefits over standard right-sided LDN yet. Further studies should explore the value of HARP in difficult cases such as the obese donor and the value of HARP for transplantation centers starting a live kidney donation program (Dutch Trial Register number: NTR3096). Nevertheless, HARP is a valuable addition to the surgical armamentarium in live donor surgery.