Comparison of Stromal Vascular Fraction and Adipose-Derived Stem Cells for Protection of Renal Function in a Rodent Model of Ischemic Acute Kidney Injury.

Aims: Few studies have compared the use of different cell types derived from adipose tissue or the optimal route for efficient and safe cell delivery in ischemic acute kidney injury (AKI). We compared the abilities of stromal vascular fraction (SVF) and adipose-derived stem cells (ADSC), injected via three different routes, to protect renal function in a rodent model of ischemic AKI. Methods: Ninety male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into 9 groups: sham, nephrectomy control, AKI control, transaortic renal arterial SVF injection, renal parenchymal SVF injection, tail venous SVF injection, transaortic renal arterial ADSC injection, renal parenchymal ADSC injection, and tail venous ADSC injection groups. Their renal function was assessed 4 days before and 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, and 14 days after surgical procedures to induce ischemic AKI. The histomorphometric studies were performed 14 days after surgical procedures. Results: Renal parenchymal injection of SVF notably reduced the level of serum blood urea nitrogen and creatinine elevation compared to the AKI control group. Renal parenchymal injection of SVF notably reduced the level of creatinine clearance decrease. In addition, collagen content was lower in the renal parenchymal SVF injection group, and fibrosis was reduced. Apoptosis was reduced in the renal parenchymal SVF injection group, and proliferation was increased. The expression levels of antioxidative markers such as glutathione reductase and peroxidase were higher in the renal parenchymal SVF injection group. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that renal function is protected from ischemic AKI through renal parenchymal injection of SVF, which has enhanced antifibrotic, antiapoptotic, and antioxidative effects.

Solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy using passive camera holder: IDEAL stage 2a study.

BACKGROUND: Solo-surgery can be defined as a practice of a surgeon operating alone using a camera holder, without other surgical members except for a scrub nurse. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. METHODS: The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. The brief study protocol was registered on the Clinical Research Information Service site of the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Candidates fulfilling all inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the clinical trial and underwent solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The feasibility was assessed by the proportion of subjects who could undergo solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy without difficulty. The perioperative complications were identified to assess the safety of solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. RESULTS: Of the 47 potential candidates from November 2018 to August 2019, 40 were enrolled in the clinical trial and seven excluded due to declining participation. The feasibility of solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy was 100%, without an occasion of any difficulty requiring conversion to the human assisted pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Fourteen intraoperative complications occurred in 10 patients. The most common intraoperative complication was spleen injury. Two of three cases classified as the Satava classification grade II were due to the incomplete stapling of endoscopic stapler. Seventy-eight postoperative complications occurred in 34 patients. The most common postoperative complication was nausea/vomiting and followed by aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase elevation. Most postoperative complication was independent of the solo-surgery itself. CONCLUSIONS: Solo-surgeon pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy using passive camera holder is technically feasible. In terms of safety, it is necessary to adjust the scope of surgery performed alone. Trial Registration CRIS, KCT0003458. Registered 30/01/2019, Retrospectively registered, https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/15868 .

Pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy without routine drainage does not increase postoperative morbidity.

PURPOSE: We aimed to define the feasibility of the omission of routine insertion of a drain after pure laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (PLDN). We compared the outcomes between those with and without routine drain insertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2014 to October 2018, 178 PLDN were consecutively performed by a single surgeon. Since October 2016, we stopped routine insertion of a drain after PLDN. Thus, the former 80 drained routinely were defined as the Drainage group and the latter 98 were defined as the Non-drainage group. One patient drained non-routinely in the Non-drainage group was excluded from the final analysis. Operative and convalescence parameters and intra- and postoperative complications were compared between the groups. Intra- and postoperative complications within 90 days of surgery were graded using the Satava and Clavien-Dindo classifications, respectively. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, except for concomitant surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and preoperative glomerular filtration rate. All operative and convalescence parameters were similar between the groups, except for postoperative glomerular filtration rate. The rates of overall intra- (22.5% versus 28.9%, p=0.337) and postoperative (62.5% versus 59.8%, p=0.713) complications were similar between the groups. The rates of potentially drain-related postoperative complications were also similar between the groups (36.3% versus 33.0%, p=0.650). Two patients per group suffered from major drain-related complications (2.5% versus 2.1%). CONCLUSIONS: PLDN without routine drainage can be performed safely without an increase in postoperative morbidity.

A randomized controlled comparison between periprostatic nerve block and pelvic plexus block at the base and apex of 14-core prostate biopsies.

PURPOSE: To compare the pain control efficacies of the pelvic plexus block (PPB), periprostatic nerve block (PNB), and controls during a 14-core basal and apical core prostate biopsy. METHODS: This randomized controlled study, performed between January 2015 and January 2016, included patients with an abnormal serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA > 3 ng/mL) level or a palpable nodule on digital rectal examination. The enrolled patients were randomized into three groups: Group 1, intrarectal local anesthesia (IRLA, 10 mL of 2% lidocaine jelly) and PPB with 3.0 mL of 2% lidocaine injected at the bilateral pelvic plexus; Group 2, IRLA and PNB with 3.0 mL of 2% lidocaine injected at both periprostatic nerves; and Group 3, only IRLA. Patients answered the visual analog scale (VAS) questionnaire at 6 time points. RESULTS: This study consisted of 163 patients (Group 1 = 55, Group 2 = 55, and Group 3 = 53). Pain at the apical biopsy location was less in Groups 1 and 2 than in Group 3 (p < 0.001, p < 0.001) and between the two local anesthetic groups (PNB + IRLA vs PPB + IRLA). Group 2 patients reported less pain than Group 1 patients (p = 0.022). Pain during the basal core biopsy was significantly less in Groups 1 and 2 than in Group 3 (p = 0.002, p < 0.001), but there were no significant differences in pain control between the two methods (PNB + IRLA vs PPB + IRLA, p = 0.054) during basal core biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: PNB + IRLA is an effective local anesthetic method for reducing pain when performing apical biopsies compared with PPB + IRLA or IRLA alone.