ArticleUrology annals
Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A single-center experience.
Article in Urology annals. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) remains the gold standard for living kidney donation. There is controversy over the optimal method for controlling the renal vessels. In this study, we assessed the outcomes of LDN and compared postoperative outcomes based on donor demographics and method of vascular control. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-center review examining all adult patients who underwent LDN from 2017 to 2022. The outcomes collected included transfusion rate, estimated blood loss (EBL), reintervention rate, and overall 30-day complication rate. We also analyzed intra- and postoperative variables, including operative duration, conversion to open, method of vascular control, change in renal function, and length of stay. Results: 168 patients were included, with the majority (81%) of patients undergoing left LDN. The median EBL was 100 mL (interquartile range 100-200 mL). Only two patients (1%) experienced hemorrhagic complications, though none was a result of clip or staple malfunction. The most common methods of arterial control were staples and clips (69%) and clips alone (28%), and the use of staples and clips was associated with longer operative duration. However, there were no significant differences in EBL, length of stay, or complication rate between groups. No patients required surgical reintervention for any reason, and there were no postoperative deaths. Conclusion: At our center, LDN was associated with low rates of hemorrhagic complications. There was no association between the method used to control the renal artery and perioperative outcomes or complication rates. Our data suggest that LDN is a safe procedure with low complication rates.
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.