Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Evolution of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Has It Now Become the Gold Standard?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

  • 423 Accesses

Abstract

Renal transplantation is the preferred treatment for end stage renal disease (ESRD). Outcomes after transplantation of a kidney from a living donor are superior to those of organs obtained from deceased donors. Traditionally performed by means of an open incision, the last two decades have seen rapid and widespread adoption of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), with techniques that continue to evolve and improve. Because LDN delivers donor safety and efficiency, offers excellent allograft function, is preferred by donors, potentially increases the live-donor pool, and since it is now the dominant form of live-donor surgery, a legitimate question can now be asked as to whether or not LDN has become the “gold standard” for living kidney donation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Banga N, Nicol D. Techniques in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. BJU Int. 2012;110(9):1368–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Claassen JA. The Gold standard: not a golden standard. Br Med J. 2005;330:1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Versi E. “Gold standard” is an appropriate term. BMJ. 1992;305(6846):187.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Smith SL. Tissue and organ transplantation. St. Louis: Mosby Year-book; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Merrill JP, Murray JE, Harrison JH, Guild WR. Successful homotransplantation of the human kidney between identical twins. JAMA. 1956;160(4):277–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, Dierks SM, Merety KS, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(19):1370–1.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gill IS, Carbone JM, Clayman RV, Fadden PA, Stone MA, et al. Laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy. J Endourol. 1994;8(2):143–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ratner LE, Ciseck LJ, Moore RG, Cigarroa FG, Kaufman HS, et al. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation. 1995;60(9):1047–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing) website. https://www.unos.org/

  10. Alston C, Spaliviero M, Gill IS. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Urology. 2005;65(5):833–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lentine KL, Lam NN, Axelrod D, Schnitzler MA, Garg AX, et al. Perioperative complications after living kidney donation: a national study. Am J Transplant. 2016;16(6):1848–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Raghuram S, Godbole HC, Dasgupta P. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the new gold standard? Int J Clin Pract. 2005;59(2):128–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lechevallier E. Laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: is it really better? Eur Urol. 2010;58(4):510–1; discussion 512–3.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ratner LE, Hiller J, Sroka M, Weber R, Sikorsky I, et al. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy removes disincentives to live donation. Transplant Proc. 1997;29(8):3402–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 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):457–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Simforoosh N, Bassiri A, Ziaee SA, Tabibi A, Salim NS, et al. Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: the first randomized clinical trial. Transplant Proc. 2003;35(7):2553–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ratner LE, Montgomery RA, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy a review of the first 5 years. Urol Clin North Am. 2001;28(4):709–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gürkan A, Kaçar S, Başak K, Varilsüha C, Karaca C. Do multiple renal arteries restrict laparoscopic donor nephrectomy? Transplant Proc. 2004;36(1):105–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. El-Galley R, Hood N, Young CJ, Deierhoi M, Urban DA. Donor nephrectomy: a comparison of techniques and results of open, hand assisted and full laparoscopic nephrectomy. J Urol. 2004;171(1):40–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Troppmann C, Perez RV, McBride M. Similar long-term outcomes for laparoscopic versus open live-donor nephrectomy kidney grafts: an OPTN database analysis of 5532 adult recipients. Transplantation. 2008;85(6):916–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Simforoosh N, Soltani MH, Basiri A, Tabibi A, Gooran S, et al. Evolution of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a single-center experience with 1510 cases over 14 years. J Endourol. 2014;28(1):34–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ahearn AJ, Posselt AM, Kang SM, Roberts JP, Freise CE. Experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy among more than 1000 cases: low complication rates, despite more challenging cases. Arch Surg. 2011;146(7):859–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yuan H, Liu L, Zheng S, Yang L, Pu C, et al. The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy for renal transplantation: an updated meta-analysis. Transplant Proc. 2013;45(1):65–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Marcelino A, Mochtar CA, Wahyudi I, Hamid AR. Obese kidney donors in the laparoscopic living nephrectomy era: how safe? Ann Transplant. 2016;21:297–300.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Cavdaroglu O, Gurluler E, Cakır U, Gurkan A, Berber I. Laparascopıc donor nephrectomy is safe for extremely old donors and provıdes a good outcome for theır recıpıents. Transplant Proc. 2015;47(5):1296–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lind MY, Hazebroek EJ, Kirkels WJ, Hop WC, Weimar W, et al. Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy: ureteral complications in recipients. Urology. 2004;63(1):36–9; discussion 39–40.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Treat EG, Schulam PG, Gritsch HA, Liu CH, Xiong S, et al. Evolution of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy technique and outcomes: a single-center experience with more than 1300 cases. Urology. 2015;85(1):107–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hu JC, Liu CH, Treat EG, Ernest A, Veale J, et al. Determinants of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy outcomes. Eur Urol. 2014;65(3):659–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Greco F, Hoda MR, Alcaraz A, Bachmann A, Hakenberg OW, et al. Laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: analysis of the existing literature. Eur Urol. 2010;58(4):498–509.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bhattu AS, Ganpule A, Sabnis RB, Murali V, Mishra S, et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy vs standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a prospective randomized comparative study. J Endourol. 2015;29(12):1334–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilson CH, Sanni A, Rix DA, Soomro NA. Laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy for live kidney donors. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Mullins CD, Thomas SK, Pradel FG, Bartlett ST. The economic impact of laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy on kidney transplantation. Transplantation. 2003;75(9):1505–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wolf Jr JS, Marcovich R, Merion RM, Konnak JW. Prospective, case matched comparison of hand assisted laparoscopic and open surgical live donor nephrectomy. J Urol. 2000;163(6):1650–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. USC Institute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Sameer M. Deshmukh & Inderbir S. Gill

Authors
  1. Sameer M. Deshmukh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Inderbir S. Gill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Inderbir S. Gill .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India

    Mahesh R. Desai

  2. Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India

    Arvind P. Ganpule

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Deshmukh, S.M., Gill, I.S. (2017). The Evolution of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: Has It Now Become the Gold Standard?. In: Desai, M., Ganpule, A. (eds) Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2849-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2849-6_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2847-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2849-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation