ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Laparoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Single Center Comparison of Three Different Techniques.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy With a Pfannenstiel Incision Using Size-Reduced Trocars.Cureus · 2024Article
- A comparison of pre- and post-operative outcomes in living donors undergoing transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy and open nephrectomy: a retrospective single-center study.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: In this study, we compare three different surgical approaches at a single institution. Pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with Pfannenstiel incision (PLDN) was compared with hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via midline hand port (HALDNM) and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy via left iliac hand port (HALDNL). Methods: This study included all laparoscopic left donor nephrectomies performed at our institution between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. Donor characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, number of renal arteries, duration of surgical procedure, warm ischemia time (WIT), and length of hospital stay were compared. Cosmetic scores were calculated by totaling the length of all incisions placed. Postoperative complications within 90 days were compared. Results: During the study period 71 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed of which 26 were HALDNM, 24 were HALDNL, and 21 were PLDN. Donor characteristics were similar in all three groups. Total operative time was significantly lower in HALDNM (181 minutes) than PLDN (233 minutes) and HALDNL (242 minutes) (p < 0.001). The WIT was comparable in all three groups: HALDNL (7.2 minutes), PLDN (4.1 minutes), and HALDM (4.9 minutes) (p = 0.913). Median cosmetic score was significantly better in the PLDN group (8.2 cm) when compared to HALDNM (11.1 cm) and HALDNL (9.9 cm) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our results show that all three technical modifications of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy are safe and feasible with good postoperative outcomes. HALDNM has the added benefit of decreased operative time while PLDN has a cosmetic advantage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.