ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Expanding the living kidney donor pool: outcomes of robotic donor nephrectomy in obese versus non-obese donors.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) offers a minimally invasive alternative to open and laparoscopic techniques for living kidney donation. As obesity rises among potential donors, data comparing RDN outcomes between non-obese and obese donors remain limited. This study evaluates the safety and feasibility of RDN in obese living kidney donors.
methodsA single-center retrospective analysis included 212 consecutive donors who underwent RDN between August 2020 and April 2025; after excluding one donor with incomplete covariate data, 211 (137 low BMI [< 30 kg/m
resultsLow BMI donors were modestly older (46.2 vs. 42.2 years; largest imbalance, standardized mean difference 0.32); overlap weighting reduced all covariate differences to approximately zero. After weighting, operating time was longer in high BMI donors (weighted difference + 15.6 min, 95% CI 6.4-24.8; p < 0.001), whereas estimated blood loss, conversion to open surgery (1.4% vs. 0.7%), complications (2.7% vs. 2.2%; all Clavien-Dindo Grade I), length of stay, and renal function through six months did not differ (all weighted p > 0.10). No perioperative deaths occurred. Exploratory subgroup analyses showed longer operating times for high BMI donors with single renal arteries (p = 0.011) and left nephrectomies (p = 0.024), without differences in blood loss or complications.
conclusionIn a rigorously selected cohort, RDN yielded short-term perioperative and functional outcomes in obese donors comparable to non-obese donors, with only a modest increase in operative time that persisted after overlap weighting. These findings support RDN as one component of responsibly expanding the donor pool; however, short-term parity does not establish long-term donor or recipient safety, and expansion must remain contingent on stringent selection, risk counseling, and structured long-term surveillance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42711589What 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.