World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 5, pp 1536–1541 | Cite as

Implantation of Right Kidneys: Is the Risk of Technical Graft Loss Real?

  • Taqi T. Khan
  • Nadeem Ahmad
  • Kashif Siddique
  • Konstantinos Fourtounas
Original Scientific Report



The left kidney (LK) is preferred by transplant surgeons, because its vein is always of good length and has a thick wall that enables safe suturing. On the other hand, the right renal vein is generally shorter and thinner walled, and well known for its technical difficulty during venous anastomosis, and can result in graft loss. We examined our living (LD) and deceased donor (DD) recipient data and compared the incidence of technical graft loss and early graft function in right and left kidneys.


A cohort of 58 adult and pediatric recipients received an LD or DD kidney between January 2015 and December 2016. The donor and recipient data were retrieved and retrospectively analyzed. Technical graft loss was defined as graft thrombosis within the 7 days after transplant.


Right kidneys (RKs) were not a risk factor for technical graft loss, and no graft was lost for technical reasons in either LD or DD transplants. Early graft function in LK and RKs was also comparable in the LD cohort, and there were no LKs in the DD cohort.


Based on our data, the use of RKs was not a risk factor for technical graft loss and early graft function was comparable to LKs.


  1. 1.
    Mandal AK et al (2001) Should the indications for laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy of the right kidney be the same as for the open procedure? Anomalous left renal vasculature is not a contraindication to laparoscopic left donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 71(5):660–664CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brunschot Ozdemir-van et al (2016) Is the reluctance for the implantation of right kidney donor kidneys justified? World J Surg 40:471–478. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3232-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Toufeeq Khan TF et al (2010) Right renal vein augmentation in deceased donor kidney transplantation: Importance of the contiguous inferior vena cava. Urotoday Int J. doi: 10.3834/uij.1944-5784.2010.12.08 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liu KL, Chiang YJ, Wang HH, Chu SH (2008) Techniques of vascular control in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Transplant Proc 40:2342–2344CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Khalil A, Mujtaba MA, Taber TE (2016) Trends and outcomes in right vs. left living donor nephrectomy: an analysis of the OPTN/UNOS database of donor and recipient outcomes–should we be doing more right-sided nephrectomies? Clin Transpl 30(2):145–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adler JT, Markmann JF, Yeh H (2016) Renal allograft thrombosis after living donor transplantation: risk factors and obstacles to retransplantation. Clin Transpl 30(8):864–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ko EY et al (2008) Utility of the endovascular stapler for right sided laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a 7-year experience at Mayo Clinic. J Am Coll Surg 207(6):896–903CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu et al (2014) Maximizing the donor pool: left versus right laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy-systemic review and meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol 46(8):1511–1519CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amezquita Y et al (2008) Risk factors for early renal graft thrombosis: a case-controlled study in grafts from the same donor. Transplant Proc 40(9):2891–2893CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vacher-Coponat H et al (2013) Inferior early posttransplant outcomes for recipients of right versus left deceased donor kidneys: an ANZDATA registry analysis. Am J Transplant 13(2):399–405CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bakir N et al (1996) Primary renal graft thrombosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 11(1):140–147CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Phelan PJ et al (2009) Left versus right deceased donor renal allograft outcome. Transpl Int 22(12):1159–1163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brown WNSL, Biehl TR, Rawlins MC et al (2001) Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a comparison of the conventional open approach. J Urol 2001(165):766–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang SC, Ko WJ, Byun YJ et al (2001) Retroperitoneoscopy-assisted live donor nephrectomy: the Yonsei experience. J Urol 164:1099–1102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Modi P, Kadam G, Devra A (2007) Obtaining cuff of inferior vena cava by use of the endo-TA stapler in retropertoneoscopic right side donor nephrectomy. Urology 69(5):832–834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hellegering J et al (2012) Deleterious influence of prolonged warm ischemia in living donor kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc 44:1222–1226CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marzouk K et al (2013) The impact of vascular anastomosis time on early kidney transplant outcomes. Transplant Res 2:8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Toufeeq Khan TF et al. (2013) Prevention of poor early graft function using open nephrectomy, and minimizing the risk of procedure-related factors. Urotoday Int J 6(3), art 30. doi: 10.3834/uij.1944-5784.2013.06.04

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Taqi T. Khan
    • 1
  • Nadeem Ahmad
    • 1
  • Kashif Siddique
    • 2
  • Konstantinos Fourtounas
    • 3
  1. 1.Institution Division of Transplant Surgery, Prince Sultan Kidney CenterKing Salman Armed Forces HospitalTabukSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Department of Medical BiostatisticsKing Salman Armed Forces HospitalTabukSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Institution Division of Nephrology, Prince Sultan Kidney CenterKing Salman Armed Forces HospitalTabukSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations