Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/28615
Title: Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy in the Republic of North Macedonia
Authors: Gavrilovska-Brzanov, Aleksandra 
Stavridis, Sotir 
Dohchev, Sasho
Mijovska Mojsova, Maja
Petrusheva-Panovska, Aleksandra
Trifunovski, Aleksandar
Janculev, Josif
Trajkovski, Dimitar
Stankov, Viktor 
Jovanovski -Srceva, Marija 
Brzanov, Nikola
Keywords: laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy
hand assisted
open classical living donor nephrectomy
kidney transplant
Issue Date: Jul-2023
Publisher: Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Journal: Prilozi (Makedonska akademija na naukite i umetnostite. Oddelenie za medicinski nauki) 
Abstract: Introduction: Hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy has become the technique of choice for living donor kidney donations. Since 2018, 30 procedures have been performed at our clinic using this technique. The goal of this comparative analysis was to determine how surgical technique, specifically, hand-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy with hand assistance may affect early graft function when compared to open classical nephrectomy. Material and methods: Retrospective analyses were performed, comparing the two techniques of kidney donation. Kidney transplantation was performed with the open standard technique in both groups. The primary outcome was early graft function, and levels of urine output, and plasma creatinine were analyzed at three time points. A secondary outcome was the quality of the operative technique, which was determined by the time of warm ischemia, blood loss, and duration of surgery. Additionally, we noted all complications, length of hospital stay, and patient satisfaction. Results: In terms of warm ischemia time, there was no statistically significant difference between donors in both groups. It is important to note that in 2 recipients from Group II we did not observe diuresis at the conclusion of the operation. The recipients' diuresis was 515 ml ± 321SD in group I and 444 ml ± 271SD in group II. At 3, 12, and 36 hours postoperatively, there were statistically significant differences in the average serum creatinine values (p 0.05) in favor of group I. Similar results were observed in the second time measurement at 12 h and the third time measurement at 36 h for serum urea levels in recipients. The difference in serum urea values between the recipients in the groups at the first measurement (3h) following surgery was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is recognized as a safe and effective treatment. Donors in this situation have a different profile from other surgical patients; hence, they do not undergo surgery due to their own medical condition but for an altruistic reason, and with hand-assisted living donor nephrectomy. Such patients receive all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. The two main objectives of a donor nephrectomy are to give the recipient the best possible kidney and to ensure the donor's complete safety.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12188/28615
DOI: 10.2478/prilozi-2023-0026
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Medicine: Journal Articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

40
checked on Apr 29, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.