Comparison of Optical Trocar Access Versus Veress Needle Insertion Technique for Peritoneal Entry in Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

BACKGROUND

Nearly half of all complications in laparoscopic surgery occur at the intraperitoneal access. We compared direct optical entry (DOE) with Veress needle entry (VNE) in terms of abdominal entry time and entry-associated complications in patients who underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN).

METHODS

Between June 2010 and July 2023, data from 813 patients who underwent LDN were analyzed. Age, male-to-female ratio, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, body mass index, operation side, previous abdominal surgery, abdominal entry technique, abdominal entry time, entry-associated complications, conversion to different abdominal entry techniques, and conversion to open surgery were evaluated.

RESULTS

DOE and VNE were performed on 433 and 281 patients, respectively. Age (48.89 ± 12.11 vs 47.59 ± 11.34 years), male-to-female ratio (44.8% vs 40.9% males and 55.2% vs 59.1% females), ASA score (2 vs 2 median ASA score), body mass index (26.72 ± 6.11 vs 27.07 ± 5.83 kg/m2), and operation side (63.0% vs 61.3% left nephrectomy) were not statistically significant differences between the DOE and VNE groups (P > .05). However, abdominal entry time was significantly reduced in the DOE group compared with the VNE group (26.8 ± 20.8 vs 49.5 ± 34.1 seconds, P = .007, respectively). Entry-associated complications were observed in 8 (1.12%) patients. No major (grades 3-5) complications were observed. There were no statistically significant differences in overall (0.6% vs 1.7%, P = .291), grade 1, and grade 2 complication rates between the DOE and VNE groups (0.4% vs 1.4%, P = .366; 0.2% vs 0.3%, P = .714, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

DOE and VNE are not foolproof. DOE is a safe, feasible, and faster technique in patients who underwent LDN.

Expanding the Indications of Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for Highly Complex Renal Tumors: Urologists' Perception of the Impact of Hyperaccuracy Three-Dimensional Reconstruction

OBJECTIVES

To assess the role of three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction in aiding preoperative planning for highly complex renal tumors amenable to robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Computed tomography (CT) scans and respective 3D reconstructions of 20 highly complex renal tumors were displayed to the attendees/urologists of the 6th Techno-Urology Meeting ( www.technourologymeeting.com ). These 20 cases had already undergone RPN performed by a single experienced surgeon. The attendees were asked to watch the videos of the CT scans first, and then the respective 3D reconstructions of 5 of the 20 cases who were randomly selected. A purpose-built questionnaire collected responders' surgical experience and surgical indication (RPN versus nephrectomy) after viewing the CT scan and the respective 3D reconstructions.

RESULTS

Twenty expert urologists, 27 young urologists, and 61 residents (total = 108) participated in the study. Five hundred forty-two views of the cases were obtained. Based on CT scans, RPN was indicated in 256 cases (47.2%). After viewing the respective 3D reconstructions, in 148 cases the responders changed their idea: indication to RPN raised in 404 cases (74.5%) (P < .001). The opinions changed regardless of the surgical experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study are encouraging, and they might represent a significant step toward the validation of the use of 3D reconstruction for surgical planning in patients undergoing robotic kidney surgery. The use of this technology might translate into a larger adoption of nephron-sparing approach. Further investigation in this area is warranted to corroborate these findings.