Observational studyWorld journal of urology2022
Outcomes after 20 years of experience in minimally invasive living-donor nephrectomy.
Observational study in World journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The incidence and classification of intraoperative adverse events in urological surgery: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Lapdoctor: Multicentre Validation of a Scoring System for Preoperative Evaluation of Difficulty of Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2025Article
- Article
- Living donor-gifted allograft lithiasis: surgical experience after bench surgery stone removal and follow-up.Urolithiasis · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
18 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe transperitoneal laparoscopic approach is considered the gold standard technique for living kidney donation. Other accepted laparoscopic techniques include the retroperitoneal approach, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)-assisted, laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery (LESS), with excellent results in the donor and graft. Many studies have compared these techniques with open ones. Our objective is to describe our experience and results in minimally invasive living-donor nephrectomies (MILDN): laparoscopic, NOTES-assisted, and LESS since their introduction in March 2002. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective observational study of donors undergoing MILDN between March 2002 and March 2020.
resultsA total of 714 MILDNs were performed at our centre. All were completed, except for one, because of recipient death. The conventional laparoscopic approach was used in 541 cases (75.88%), NOTES in 116 (16.9%), LESS in 55 (7.7%), and one mini open (0.14%). Two-thirds of the donors were females (478 cases). The mean donor age was 52.87 years (SD 10.93). Six donors (0.8%) were diagnosed beforehand with a small renal mass, which was removed before transplantation in bench surgery. The right kidney was removed in 17.8% of cases. Warm ischaemia time was higher in the NOTES and LESS groups. We had eight conversions. The global intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were 6.8% and 4.9%, respectively. None of the donors developed renal disease during follow-up (mean 3.68 years). Five-year recipient and graft survival rates were 98.8% and 96.8%, respectively.
conclusionsMILDN techniques are safe for donors and grafts, with low complication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.