期刊文献+

A bidirectional cohort study to compare the outcomes of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches in subjects undergoing laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy

暂未订购
导出
摘要 Background:Laparoscopic transperitoneal donor nephrectomy(LTDN)is currently the standard procedure for renal donation from living donors.Only a handful of clinical studies have compared the outcomes of retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy(RDN)and LTDN.More robust data and systematic comparative analyses of the outcomes and complications of these 2 techniques are needed.This study aimed to elucidate the noninferiority of RDN to LTDN.Materials and methods:All live renal donors who underwent either RDN or LTDN at our institution during the period of January 2015 to March 2021 were considered subjects,excluding those who refused to participate in the study.This was a bidirectional cohort study.Demographic and clinical data were collected and analyzed using standard statisticalmethods.Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.Results:Our study included 89 subjects:40 in the LTDN group and 49 in the RDN group.The RDN group had significantly shorter warm ischemia time(2.85 vs.6.04 minutes),a lower fall in hemoglobin on postoperative day(POD)-1(1.73 vs.2.24 g/dL),lower estimated blood loss(601.93 vs.797.27 mL),and lower pain on POD-1(0.78 vs.1.28).The improvement in recipient’s estimated glomerular filtration rate on POD-30 was significantly higher in the RDN group(79.98 vs.63.73 mL/min/1.73 m^(2)).There was a significantly higher fall in estimated glomerular filtration rate of donor after nephrectomy in RDN group on POD-30(35.53 vs.30.60 mL/min/1.73 m^(2)).However,there were no significant differences in other parameters.Conclusions:Our study,conducted in India,showed that themajority of RDN outcomes were better than those of LTDN.Hence,RDN is clearly non-inferior to the gold standard LTDN.A well-designed randomized controlled study is required to elucidate the statistical superiority of one approach over another.
机构地区 Department of Urology
出处 《Current Urology》 2025年第3期218-223,共6页 当代泌尿学(英文)
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献9

  • 1Bachmann A,Wolff T,Ruszat R,Giannini O,Dickenmann M,Gtirke L et al.Retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy:a retrospective,non-randomized comparison of early complications,donor and recipient outcome with the standard open approach[].European Urology.2005
  • 2Rettkowski O,Hamza A,Markau S,Osten B,Fomara P.Ten years of laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy:retrospect and prospect from the nephrologist‘s point of view[].Transplantation Proceedings.2007
  • 3Nogueira,JM,Cangro,CB,Fink,JC,Schweitzer,E,Wiland,A,Klassen,DK,Gardner,J,Flowers,J,Jacobs,S,Cho,E,Philosophe,B,Bartlett,ST,Weir,MR.A comparison of recipient renal outcomes with laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy[].Transplantation.1999
  • 4Ruiz-Deya,G,Cheng,G,Palmer,E,Thomas,R,Slakey,D.Open donor, laparoscopic donor and hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison of outcomes[].Journal d Urologie.2001
  • 5GIESSING M,REUTER S,DEGER S, et al.Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy in germany : impact on donor health -relatedquality of life and willingness to donate[].Transplantation Proceedings.2005
  • 6Gao ZL,Wu JT,Yang DD,et al.Retroperitoneoscopic right living donor nephrectomy[].Chinese Medical Journal English Edition.2007
  • 7K. Tanabe N. Miyamoto,T. Tokumoto,H. Yamamoto,H. Ishida,T. Kondo,H. Okuda,H. Shinmmura,H. Shirakawa,T. Shimizu,N. Ishikawa and H. Toma.Retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy: Extended experience in a single center[].Transplantation.2004
  • 8Ng,CS,Abreu,SC,Abou El-Fettouh,HI,Kaouk,JH,Desai,MM,Goldfarb,DA,Gill,IS.Right retroperitoneal versus left transperitoneal laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy[].Urology.2004
  • 9Shokeir,AA,Gad,HM,el-Diasty,T.Role of radioisotope renal scans in the choice of nephrectomy side in live kidney donors[].Journal d Urologie.2003

共引文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部