Impact of intraoperative heparin on laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

PURPOSE: At many centers systemic heparinization is performed during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy because of concerns regarding graft thrombosis. However, no consensus exists in this regard. We evaluated the impact of intraoperative heparin on donor and recipient outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2000 and February 2003, 79 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic live donor left nephrectomy at our institution. They were sequentially divided into 2 groups, that is group 1-the initial 40 patients who intraoperatively received 5,000 IU heparin intravenously and group 2-subsequent patients who did not receive heparin. The 2 groups were well matched demographically. Data were compared using the paired 2-tailed t test. RESULTS: The 2 donor groups were comparable in regard to mean blood loss (139 vs 179 cc, p = 0.59), intraoperative urine output (1.6 vs 1.6 l, p = 0.74), warm ischemia time (4 vs 4.2 minutes, p = 0.52), operative time (3.5 vs 3.5 hours, p = 0.97), and cold ischemia time (75 vs 82 minutes, p = 0.38). Complications occurred in 1 patient in group 1 (rhabdomyolysis induced acute renal failure) and in 2 in group 2 (chylous ascites and lumbar vein injury, respectively). No graft was lost due to vascular thrombosis in either group. Recipient immediate, early and delayed (6-month) graft function was comparable between the 2 groups. Acute rejection occurred in 5 recipients in group 1 and 1 in group 2. There was 1 recipient death per group at delayed followup. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of heparin during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is not necessary. Because of its potential for causing intraoperative or early postoperative hemorrhage, we no longer routinely administer intraoperative heparin during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy at our institution.     

Antidiuretic hormone release during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic procedures, increased intra-abdominal pressure may cause transient renal dysfunction due to impaired renal blood flow and induction of neurohormones. However, the relationship between antidiuretic hormone (ADH) secretion and increased intra-abdominal pressure is poorly understood. HYPOTHESIS: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is associated with an increase in plasma ADH concentration, which influences renal function in both the donor and transplanted graft. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate plasma ADH levels during LDN and to correlate ADH levels with graft function. DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS: In 30 patients who underwent LDN, plasma ADH levels were collected before insufflation, during surgery, after desufflation, and 24 hours after the procedure. In 6 patients who had open donor nephrectomy, blood samples were obtained as controls. Furthermore, graft function, operative characteristics, and clinical outcome were compared. SETTING: University hospital. RESULTS: In the LDN group, mean ADH levels during pneumoperitoneum and 30 minutes postinsufflation were significantly higher compared with preinsufflation values (P<.001). Twenty-four hours after LDN, mean ADH levels had returned to normal values. There were no significant differences in ADH levels in the open donor nephrectomy group. No significant differences in either intraoperative diuresis, blood pressure readings, or postoperative graft function were documented among the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, LDN was associated with an increase in plasma ADH that appeared to be related to increased intra-abdominal pressure. We conclude that the increased ADH concentrations during LDN are not associated with clinically significant changes in either the kidney donor or the transplanted graft.     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: comparison to pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is assumed to be easier to learn than the standard approach and simplifies intact kidney removal. Herein we have presented our experience performing hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) compared with contemporary pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). We retrospectively analyzed 55 patients who underwent LDN. Among the procedures, 21 were HALDN and 34 were pure LDN. We compared the two groups with regard to operative time, warm ischemic time (WIT), estimated blood loss, conversion rate, postoperative stay, and complications. For the HALDN group, the mean operative time was 191 minutes, WIT varied from 2 to 11 minutes, and bleeding estimates varied from 100 to 4000 mL. The overall complication rate of 28.6% included: vessel injury, urinary leakage, and paralytic ileus. In the LDN group, the mean operative time was 184 minutes, WIT varied from 2 to 10 minutes, and bleeding estimated varied 100 to 3000 mL. Three patients (8.8%) had complications including ureteral obstruction (n = 1) and vessel injury (n = 2). There was no significant difference between the two groups about the procedure and the complications. Our series suggested that HALDN and LDN were similar, with a tendency toward better results in LDN group, which also shows lower costs.     

Methods of vascular control during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

Vascular control during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) requires expeditious control of the renal artery and vein while preserving maximum graft vascular length. The vascular stapler with three rows of staples on either side of the division has been widely used, but it loses more vascular length than other methods. In the accompanying video, we illustrate vascular control with the different staplers and locking polymer clips. The techniques include two nonabsorbable polymer ligating clips (10-mm Hem-o-Lok; MLX Weck Closure Systems), the Endo-GIA Universal stapler (35-mm length, 2.5-mm staples; Autosuture), and the Endo-TA 30 stapler (30-mm length, 2.5-mm staples; Autosuture). In an in-vitro study, we previously determined that the Endo-TA 30 stapler and the polymer clips resulted in significantly less compromise of the vessel length compared with the other methods of vascular control. LDN has been recently included by the clip manufacturer as a contraindication for the use of the polymer locking clips. The Endo TA stapler can be used when preservation of maximum graft vascular length is important.     

Use of Hem-o-lok clips effectively lengthens renal vein during laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy

We retrospectively reviewed our last 12 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies (LDNs) in which both the renal artery and the renal vein were controlled using 2 Hem-o-lok clips (Weck Closure Systems, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States) on the proximal sides and the vessels were divided without securing the graft-side vessels (group 1). We compared the results with our 12 immediately preceding LDN donors in whom the arteries were controlled with 3 endoclips and the veins were controlled with staplers (group 2). The length of the vein was significantly longer (approximately 4 mm difference) in group 1, mainly due to trimmed staples from the graft vessels. Both cohorts of donors had uneventful surgery with no complications, and all the recipients recovered smoothly without any delayed graft function. Average operation time and warm ischemia time were similar among both groups (189 vs 207 minutes; 168 vs 149 seconds, respectively; both P > .1). We conclude that the use of Hem-o-lok effectively lengthens graft renal veins and is less costly during LDN.     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

Background: The hand-assisted approach to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) might minimize the learning curve and shorten both the operation and the warm ischemia time. Our initial results from hand-assisted LDN are presented and compared with data from the literature. Methods: From January to September 2000, ten hand-assisted LDNs of the right kidney were performed. Results: The median operation time was 140 min (range, 120--400 min), and the warm ischemia time was 2.5 min (range, 1--4 min). There were no conversions. Postoperative morbidity included one urinary tract infection. All but one patient returned to a normal diet within 48 h. Opiates were needed a maximum of 48 h. One recipient experienced initial loss of graft function as a result of unknown causes. Conclusions: Even at the beginning of the learning curve, operation time and warm ischemia time are significantly reduced by the hand-assisted approach, as compared with conventional LDN. apd: 3 April 2001     

活体供肾移植:手助腹腔镜供肾切除优于常规腹腔镜供肾切除

目的　比较活体供肾移植中手助腹腔镜供肾切除 (Hand -assistedlaparoscopicdonornephrectomy ,HALDN)和完全腹腔镜活体供肾切除 (Laparoscopicdonornephrectomy,LDN)以及对供肾者和接受肾移植者的影响。　方法　回顾总结 1996年 10月～ 2 0 0 1年 2月MountSinai医学中心所有LDN和HALDN的病例资料。 1996年 10月开始行LDN手术 ,1999年 6月转而行HALDN手术。　结果　与LDN组相比 ,HALDN组手术时间明显缩短 ( ( 2 11± 7)minvs ( 2 5 7± 5 )min ,P <0 0 5 ) ,术中出血量明显减少 ( ( 12 2± 17)mlvs ( 2 86± 33)ml,P <0 0 5 ) ,肾脏热缺血时间明显缩短 ( ( 10 6± 6 )svs ( 2 5 7± 8)s,P <0 0 5 ) ,术后淋巴漏和血栓形成发生率 ( 0 %vs 13 7% ( 16例 ) ;2 5 % ( 2例 )vs 6 8% ( 8例 ) ,P <0 0 5 )明显下降。　结论　在活体供肾移植中 ,HALDN似乎优于LDN ,但尚需要前瞻性对照研究予以进一步证实。     

Non-invasive monitoring of tissue oxygenation during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

Background

A surgical resection is currently the preferred treatment for esophageal cancer if the tumor is considered to be resectable without evidence of distant metastases (cT1-3 N0-1 M0). A high percentage of irradical resections is reported in studies using neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone and in trials in which patients are treated with surgery alone. Improvement of locoregional control by using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy might therefore improve the prognosis in these patients. We previously reported that after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with weekly administrations of Carboplatin and Paclitaxel combined with concurrent radiotherapy nearly always a complete R0-resection could be performed. The concept that this neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy regimen improves overall survival has, however, to be proven in a randomized phase III trial.

Methods/design

The CROSS trial is a multicenter, randomized phase III, clinical trial. The study compares neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery with surgery alone in patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer, with inclusion of 175 patients per arm. The objectives of the CROSS trial are to compare median survival rates and quality of life (before, during and after treatment), pathological responses, progression free survival, the number of R0 resections, treatment toxicity and costs between patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery with surgery alone for surgically resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma. Over a 5 week period concurrent chemoradiotherapy will be applied on an outpatient basis. Paclitaxel (50 mg/m2) and Carboplatin (Area-Under-Curve = 2) are administered by i.v. infusion on days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29. External beam radiation with a total dose of 41.4 Gy is given in 23 fractions of 1.8 Gy, 5 fractions a week. After completion of the protocol, patients will be followed up every 3 months for the first year, every 6 months for the second year, and then at the end of each year until 5 years after treatment. Quality of life questionnaires will be filled out during the first year of follow-up.

Discussion

This study will contribute to the evidence on any benefits of neoadjuvant treatment in esophageal cancer patients using a promising chemoradiotherapy regimen.

Trial registration

ISRCTN80832026     

Techniques in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Innovations in laparoscopic surgery have provided transplant surgeons with a range of techniques as well as a vast array of minimally invasive instruments. Whilst randomized control trials have compared open and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, there is a paucity of high quality data comparing different laparoscopic approaches. This article summarizes the main techniques of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy currently in use and reviews the evidence available for each. In addition, controversial aspects of donor nephrectomy are examined, including the technological advances applicable to this operation. Increasing numbers of living donor kidney transplants are being performed worldwide, and the majority of donor operations are now laparoscopic. Transperitoneal ‘pure’ and hand‐assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are the two most commonly performed procedures, although retroperitoneal approaches are advocated by some centres. Controversy persists with respect to the technical aspects of donor nephrectomy, including both the approach and the method of ligation of the hilar vessels. More recently, robot‐assisted, laparo‐endoscopic single site surgery (LESS) and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) ‐assisted donor nephrectomy have also been performed, further increasing the number of options available, but creating uncertainty as to the ideal approach.     

Rhabdomyolysis after laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

Rhabdomyolysis is a postoperative complication that may result in acute renal failure owing to excessive myoglobinuria. After uncomplicated laparoscopic left transperitoneal donor nephrectomy, a 32-year-old man developed anuric acute renal failure secondary to postoperative rhabdomyolysis that required intermittent hemodialysis for 2 weeks. The presumed risk factors in this case were the patient's high body mass index, intraoperative flank position with flexion, a solitary kidney, and the duration of surgery. Our current surgical technique has been modified to drop the kidney bridge early, immediately after visualization of the hilum.     

Hand-assisted laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy

BACKGROUND: Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HLDN) may have advantages over laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, such as shorter learning curve, operation and warm ischaemia times. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of HLDN. METHODS: Between January 2000 and October 2002, 50 consecutive HLDN procedures were performed through a low transverse abdominal incision, 23 right sided and 27 left sided. RESULTS: The median age of the donors was 44 years. No HLDN required conversion to an open procedure. The median operating time for HLDN was 153 min. The median warm ischaemia time was 3 (range 1.0-4.5) min and the median blood loss was 50 (range 20-500) ml in both left- and right-sided procedures. Eight patients suffered ten minor complications during their admission. The duration of hospital stay was 5 days for donors. Three recipients developed graft failure owing to acute rejection, renal vein thrombosis and ischaemic necrosis. CONCLUSION: Both left- and right-sided HLDN procedures were feasible and safe through a low transverse abdominal incision.     

A comparison of traditional open,minimal-incision donor nephrectomy and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) and minimal-incision donor nephrectomy (MILD) are less invasive procedures than the traditional open donor nephrectomy approach (ODN). This study compares donor and recipient outcome following those three different procedures. Sixty consecutive donor nephrectomies were studied (n=20 in each group). Intra-operative variables, analgesic requirements, donor recovery, donor/recipient complications and allograft function were recorded prospectively. Operating and first warm ischaemia times were longer for LDN than for ODN and MILD (232±35 vs 121±24 vs 147±27 min, P<0.001; 4±1 vs 2±2 vs 2±1 min, P<0.01). Postoperative morphine requirements were significantly higher after ODN than after MILD and LDN (182±113 vs 86±48 vs 71±45 mg; P<0.0001). There was no episode of delayed graft function in this study. Donors returned to work quicker after LDN than after ODN and MILD (6±2 vs 11±5 vs 10±7; P=0.055). Donor and recipient complication rates and recipient allograft function were comparable. We concluded that MILD and LDN reduce postoperative pain and allow a faster recovery without compromising recipient outcome.     

The myocardial contractile responses to protamine sulfate and heparin

The administration of protamine sulfate for the reversal of heparin anticoagulation has been associated with adverse hemodynamic changes including hypotension and decreased cardiac output. The possible direct toxic effect of protamine on human right atrial trabeculae contracting isometrically in vitro was studied. Muscles were stimulated to contract at 1 Hz in Tyrode's solution (maintained at 34 degrees C, pH 7.4) into which protamine was continuously added. Following a polynomial regression analysis, a parabolic dose-response curve resulted. The equation was: y = 95.13 + 38.76x - 278.71x2 where y = relative developed force and x = concentration of protamine (milligrams per milliliters) (r = 0.82). The estimated concentration of protamine resulting in 50% developed force was 0.48 mg/ml. In a second series of experiments, protamine was added to the bath along with a neutralizing amount of heparin. This resulted in a limited reduction in the fall of relative developed force. Thus, protamine in high concentrations alone or in complex with heparin has a direct toxic effect on human myocardial muscle mechanics, and care is warranted in its clinical use.