Is a High Body Mass Index Still a Risk Factor for Complications of Donor Nephrectomy?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The incidence of obesity is increasing all around the world and Turkey is no exception. In Turkey, 80.1% of all kidney transplants performed in 2013 were living donor kidney transplants. In this study we compare the early postoperative complications of living kidney donors with a body mass index (BMI) over 30 to those with BMIs under 30. PATIENTS AND METHOD: All donor nephrectomies performed at the Ege University School of Medicine Hospital between May 2013 and May 2014 were included in the study. Donors' demographics, preoperative BMI, operation time, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and perioperative blood creatinine levels were analyzed. RESULTS: There were a total of 72 donors, 50 of whom had a BMI below 30 (group 1), whereas 22 had a BMI of 30 or higher (Group 2). The median age was 47 (±12.6) and 52.2 (±8.4) for Groups 1 and 2, respectively. The median BMI was 26.1 (±2.3) for Group 1 and 31.8 (±1.5) for Group 2. There was no significant difference in operation time (P = .980) between the 2 groups. There was no difference in the length of hospitalization with an average hospital stay of 3 days for both groups. No major complications were observed in either group. There was no difference in minor complication rates for both groups. CONCLUSION: High BMI donors can safely donate their kidney with no significant increase in complication rates at high-volume transplantation centers.

Comparison of Preemptive Kidney Transplantation With Nonpreemptive Kidney Transplantation in a Single Center: A Follow-up Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The effect of preemptive transplantation of kidneys from living donors on patient and allograft survival is controversial. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether preemptive kidney transplantation performed without the development of patient dialysis-related complications has a favorable effect on patient and graft survival. PATIENTS AND METHOD: The study included 334 adult renal transplant recipients. Patients who underwent renal transplantation between January 2008 and December 2012 at a tertiary referral teaching hospital were followed, and outcomes were obtained by retrospective chart review. A total of 244 patients underwent dialysis before renal transplantation, whereas 90 patients underwent preemptive transplantation. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to patients and graft survival rates (P > .05). Patient survival rates in preemptive and nonpreemptive groups were 98.9% and 96.3% in the first year, respectively (P = .199). Graft survival rates in preemptive and nonpreemptive groups were 96.7% and 93.0% in the first year, respectively (P = .163). Patient survival rates in preemptive and nonpreemptive groups were 98.9% and 95.7% in the third year, respectively (P = .155). Graft survival rates in preemptive and nonpreemptive groups were 93.5% and 88.5% in the third year, respectively (P = .138). There was a significant difference among years with regard to ratio of patients with preemptive transplantation (P = .009). The ratio was 17.5% in 2008, whereas it rose to 43.1% in 2012. CONCLUSION: Although preemptive kidney transplantation does not provide a significant patient and allograft survival advantage compared to nonpreemptive kidney transplantation, both therapeutic modalities provide good outcomes. Preemptive kidney transplantation has been an increasingly frequent renal replacement therapy option in recent years.

Results of surgery-related complications in donors of right lobe liver graft: analysis of 272 cases.

BACKGROUND: Living donor liver transplantation has been a new light of hope for patients with end-stage liver failure on the cadaveric waiting list. However, living donor liver transplantation still has ethical problems which cannot be overcome. Exposure of healthy donor candidates to major surgery which can be fatal is the largest of these ethical problems. In this study, we aimed to determine our rate of complications associated with surgery in donors who underwent right lobe donor hepatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2004 and December 2009, 548 liver donor candidates were examined. The right liver lobe donor hepatectomy was performed on 272 donor candidates who passed the elimination system. Demographic data as well as intraoperative findings, complication rates, and numbers were collected retrospectively. Donor complications were categorized according to the Clavien classification. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-two donors who underwent right lobe donor hepatectomy were included in this study. One hundred sixteen (42.6%) of 272 donors were female, whereas 156 (57.4%) were male. There was no donor mortality. Grade 1 and grade 2 complications were observed in 105 (38%) of 272 donors. The most common complications were fever of unknown origin (20.9%) and prolonged hyperbilirubinemia (3.6%). Grade 3 complications and grade 4 complications were observed in 6 donors (2%) and 3 donors (1%), respectively. Three donors were underwent re-operation due to bleeding. The re-laparatomy rate in our series was detected as 1.10%. One donor, categorized as grade 4B according to the Clavien classification, had small bowel perforation and intra-abdominal sepsis secondary to mechanical bowel obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Donor mortality is a fact of living donor liver transplantation that cannot be ignored like donor morbidity. However, right liver lobe donor hepatectomy can be performed successfully with minimal complication rates with multidisciplinary and rigorous donor care in the preoperative and postoperative period.

Preoperative helical computerized tomography estimation of donor liver volume.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of spiral computed tomography (CT) and 3-D imaging models in measuring total and segmental liver volume in potential living donors. METHODS: A prospective study was undertaken to assess the correlation between the volumes of potential donor livers determined via helical CT and the actual volumes measured during operation in 150 donor candidates. Left-lateral segment (S2,3) or left-lobe (S2,3,4) transplantation was performed in 36 cases with 96 right-lobe liver transplants (S5,6,7,8). Ten donor candidates were refused owing to inadequate liver volumes, and 8 for other reasons. RESULTS: The regression analysis model showed a significant correlation between the preoperative CT estimates of graft volume and intraoperative weight measurement of harvested grafts in living liver donors (F: 5525.37; P < .05); 97.7% of changes in CT volume were explained by differences in graft mass (R2: 0.977). CONCLUSION: Preoperative estimation of segmental volumes of the donor liver is necessary to avoid donor-recipient size disparity, thereby preventing hepatic failure of donors after harvesting. It has a major impact on donor selection and type of surgical management. The accuracy of helical CT was high to determine total and segmental liver volumes.