Robot-assisted Kidney Transplantation: The European Experience
Background: Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) has recently been introduced to reduce the morbidity of open kidney transplantation (KT). Objective: To evaluate perioperative and early postoperative RAKT outcomes. Design, setting and participants: This was a multicenter prospective observat...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2018 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau) |
| Repositorio: | r-IIB SANT PAU. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica del Instituto de Investigación Biomédica Sant Pau |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com:p3977 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://iibsantpau.fundanetsuite.com/Publicaciones/ProdCientif/PublicacionFrw.aspx?id=3977 http://hdl.handle.net/2445/121089 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Kidney transplantation Regional hypothermia Robot-assisted kidney transplantation Robotic surgery Vascular anastomosis |
| Sumario: | Background: Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) has recently been introduced to reduce the morbidity of open kidney transplantation (KT). Objective: To evaluate perioperative and early postoperative RAKT outcomes. Design, setting and participants: This was a multicenter prospective observational study of 120 patients who underwent RAKT, predominantly with a living donor kidney, in eight European institutions between July 2015 and May 2017, with minimum follow-up of 1 mo. The robot-assisted surgical steps were transperitoneal dissection of the external iliac vessels, venous/arterial anastomosis, graft retroperitonealization, and ureterovesical anastomosis. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Descriptive analysis of surgical data and their correlations with functional outcomes. Results and limitations: The median operative and vascular suture time was 250 and 38 min, respectively. The median estimated blood loss was 150 ml. No major intraoperative complications occurred, although two patients needed open conversion. The median postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate was 21.2, 45.0, 52.6, and 58.0 ml/min on postoperative day 1, 3, 7, and 30, respectively. Both early and late graft function were not related to overall operating time or rewarming time. Five cases of delayed graft function (4.2%) were reported. One case (0.8%) of wound infection, three cases (2.5%) of ileus, and four cases of bleeding (3.3%; three of which required blood transfusion), managed conservatively, were observed. One case (0.8%) of deep venous thrombosis, one case (0.8%) of lymphocele, and three cases (2.5%) of transplantectomy due to massive arterial thrombosis were recorded. In five cases (4.2%), surgical exploration was performed for intraperitoneal hematoma. Limitations of the study include selection bias, the lack of an open control group, and failure to report on patient cosmetic satisfaction. Conclusions: When performed by surgeons with robotic and KT experience, RAKT is safe and reproducible in selected cases and yields excellent graft function. Patient summary: We present the largest reported series on robot-assisted kidney transplantation. Use of a robotic technique can yield low complication rates, rapid recovery, and excellent graft function. Further investigations need to confirm our promising data. (c) 2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
|---|