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

Abstract

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 statistical methods. 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 m²). 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 m²). However, there were no significant differences in other parameters.

Conclusions: Our study, conducted in India, showed that the majority 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.

Keywords

Transperitoneal laparoscopy / Retroperitoneoscopy / Living-donor nephrectomy

Acknowledgments

None.

Statement of ethics

This study was approved by NU Hospitals, Bengaluru, India, with an ethical approval number EC-CT-2017-0006. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Funding source

None.

Author contributions

All authors participated in research design, writing of the paper and performance of the research, contributed new reagents or analytic tools, and participated in data analysis.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

[1] Janki S, Steyerberg EW, Hofman A, IJzermans JN. Live kidney donation: Are concerns about long-term safety justified?—A methodological review. Eur J Epidemiol 2017; 32(2):103-111.

[2] Moukarzel M, Chalouhy C, Harake N, Richa F. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: Techniques and results. In: Miana Gabriela Pop. Basic Princ Pract Surg. London: Intechopen; 2018.

[3] Özdemir-van Brunschot DM, Koning GG, van Laarhoven KC, et al. A comparison of technique modifications in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015; 10(3):e0121131.

[4] Murray G, Holden R. Transplantation of kidneys, experimentally and in human cases. Am J Surg 1954; 87(4):508-515.

[5] Ratner LE, Ciseck LJ, Moore RG, Cigarroa FG, Kaufman HS, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 1995;60:1047-1049.

[6] Kok NF, Lind MY, Hansson BM, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and mini incision open donor nephrectomy: Single blind, randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ 2006;333:221.

[7] Nicholson ML, Elwell R, Kaushik M, Bagul A, Hosgood SA. Health-related quality of life after living donor nephrectomy: A randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy. Transplantation 2011; 91(4):457-461.

[8] Nicholson ML, Kaushik M, Lewis GR, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy. Br J Surg 2010; 97(1):21-28.

[9] Simforoosh N, Basiri A, Shakhssalim N, et al. Long-term graft function in a randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy. Exp Clin Transplant 2012; 10(5):428-432.

[10] Andersen MH, Mathisen L, Oyen O, et al. Postoperative pain and convalescence in living kidney donors-Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy: A randomized study. Am J Transplant 2006; 6(6):1438-1443.

[11] Wolf JS Jr., Tchetgen MB, Merion RM. Hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Urology 1998; 52(5):885-887.

[12] Yang SC, Lee DH, Rha KH, Park K. Retroperitoneoscopic living donor nephrectomy: Two cases. Transplant Proc 1994; 26(4):2409.

[13] Fahlenkamp D, Rassweiler J, Fornara P, Frede T, Loening SA. Complications of laparoscopic procedures in urology: Experience with 2,407 procedures at 4 German centers. J Urol 1999; 162(3 Pt1):765-770.

[14] Wadström J, Lindström P. Hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: Initial 10 cases. Transplantation 2002; 73(11):1839-1840.

[15] Dols LF, Kok NF, Ijzermans JN. Live donor nephrectomy: A review of evidence for surgical techniques. Transpl Int 2010; 23(2):121-130.

[16] Dorin RP. Glenn’s urologic surgery. JAMA 2010;303:2192-2196.

[17] Abdelmaksoud A, Biyani CS, Bagheri F, Janetschek G. Laparoscopic approaches in urology. BJU Int 2005; 95(2):244-249.

[18] Gross JB. Estimating allowable blood loss: Corrected for dilution. Anesthesiology 1983; 58(3):277-280.

[19] Rosner B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. Toronto: Nelson Education; 2015.

[20] Gao ZL, Wu JT, Liu YJ, et al. Comparison of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy. Chin Med J (Engl) 2007; 120(24):2314-2316.

[21] Ng CS, Abreu SC, Abou El-Fettouh HI, et al. Right retroperitoneal versus left transperitoneal laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Urology 2004; 63(5):857-861.

[22] Srivastava A, Gupta N, Kumar A. Evolution of the technique of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy at a single center: Experience with more than 350 cases. Urol Int 2008; 81(4):431-436.