Robotic performance metrics model fellow proficiency in living donor nephrectomy.

We investigated the use of robotic objective performance metrics (OPM) to predict number of cases to proficiency and independence among abdominal transplant fellows performing robot-assisted donor nephrectomy (RDN). 101 RDNs were performed by 5 transplant fellows from September 2020 to October 2023. OPM included fellow percent active control time (%ACT) and handoff counts (HC). Proficiency was defined as ACT ≥ 80% and HC ≤ 2, and independence as ACT ≥ 99% and HC ≤ 1. Case number was significantly associated with increasing fellow %ACT, with proficiency estimated at 14 cases and independence at 32 cases (R2 = 0.56, p < 0.001). Similarly, case number was significantly associated with decreasing HC, with proficiency at 18 cases and independence at 33 cases (R2 = 0.29, p < 0.001). Case number was not associated with total active console time (p = 0.91). Patient demographics, operative characteristics, and outcomes were not associated with OPM, except for donor estimated blood loss (EBL), which positively correlated with HC. Abdominal transplant fellows demonstrated proficiency at 14-18 cases and independence at 32-33 cases. Total active console time remained unchanged, suggesting that increasing fellow autonomy does not impede operative efficiency. These findings may serve as a benchmark for training abdominal transplant surgery fellows independently and safely in RDN.

Robotic living donor nephrectomy is associated with reduced post-operative opioid use compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic approach.

BACKGROUND: Robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) has emerged as a safe alternative to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Having previously demonstrated comparable efficacy, this study aims to examine postoperative analgesia use (opioid and non-opioid) in the two groups. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 300 living donor nephrectomies performed at our center, comparing 150 RDN's with a contemporary cohort of 150 hand-assisted LDN's. In addition to clinical and demographic information, data on postoperative inpatient opioid and non-opioid analgesia (from patient's arrival to the surgical floor after surgery till the time of discharge) was collected. Opioid dosages were standardized by conversion to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). All patients were managed post-operatively under a standardized ERAS pathway for living donor nephrectomy patients. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in donor age, gender, and BMI between RDN and LDN groups. Total post-operative opioid use (MME's) was significantly lower in RDN patients (RDN 27.1 vs. LDN 46.3; P < 0.0001). Breakdown of opioid use with post-operative (POD) day demonstrated significantly lower use in RDN group on POD1 (RDN 8.6 vs. LDN 17.0; P < 0.05), and POD2 (RDN 3.9 vs LDN 10; P < 0.05). RDN patients had a shorter post-operative length of stay (LOS) (RDN 1.69 days vs. LDN 1.98; P = 0.0003). There were no differences between groups in non-opioid medication use, complications, and readmission rates. CONCLUSION: RDN has comparable safety to hand-assist LDN and offers additional benefits of lower postoperative opioid requirement and a shorter hospital LOS.

Utilization of older deceased donors for pediatric liver transplant may negatively impact long-term survival.

BACKGROUND: Multiple adult studies have investigated the role of older donors (ODs) in expanding the donor pool. However, the impact of donor age on pediatric liver transplantation (LT) has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: UNOS database was used to identify pediatric (≤18 years) LTs performed in the United States during 2002-22. Donors ≥40 years at donation were classified as older donors (ODs). Propensity analysis was performed with 1:1 matching for potentially confounding variables. RESULTS: A total of 10,024 pediatric liver transplantation (PLT) patients met inclusion criteria; 669 received liver grafts from ODs. Candidates receiving OD liver grafts were more likely to be transplanted for acute liver failure, have higher Model End-Stage Liver Disease/Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD/PELD) scores at LT, listed as Status 1/1A at LT, and be in the intensive care unit (ICU) at time of LT (all p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier (KM) analyses showed that recipients of OD grafts had worse patient and graft survival (p < 0.001) compared to recipients of younger donor (YD) grafts. KM analyses performed on candidates matched for acuity at LT revealed inferior patient and graft survival in recipients of deceased donor grafts (p < 0.001), but not living donor grafts (p > 0.1) from ODs. Cox regression analysis demonstrated that living donor LT, diagnosis of biliary atresia and first liver transplant were favorable predictors of recipient outcomes, whereas ICU stay before LT and transplantation during 2002-12 were unfavorable. CONCLUSION: Livers from ODs were used for candidates with higher acuity. Pediatric recipients of livers from ODs had worse outcome compared to YDs; however, living donor LT from ODs had the least negative impact on recipient outcomes.

Global liver transplantation: emerging trends and ethical challenges.

PURPOSE: Liver transplant (LT) is the only definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease (ESLD). This review aims to explore current global LT practices, with an emphasis on challenges and disparities that limit access to LT in different regions of the world. METHODS: A detailed analysis was performed of present-day liver transplant practices throughout the world, including the etiology of liver disease, patient access to transplantation, surgical costs, and ongoing ethical concerns. RESULTS: Annually, only 10% of the patients needing a liver transplant receive an organ. Currently, the USA performs the highest volume of liver transplants worldwide, followed by China and Brazil. In both North America and Europe, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is becoming the most common indication for LT, compared to hepatitis B and C in most Asian, South American, and African countries. While deceased donor liver transplant remains the most performed type of LT, living donor liver transplant is becoming increasingly popular in some parts of the world where it is often the only option due to a lack of well-developed infrastructure for deceased organ donation. Ethical concerns in liver transplantation fundamentally revolve around the definition of a deceased donor and the exploitation of living donor liver donation systems. CONCLUSION: Globally, liver transplant practices and outcomes are varied, with differences driven by healthcare policies, inequities in healthcare access, and ethical concerns.

The impact of a dedicated operating room team on robotic transplant program growth and fellowship training.

INTRODUCTION: Despite considerable interest in robotic surgery, successful incorporation of robotics into transplant programs has been challenging. Lack of a dedicated OR team with expertise in both robotics and transplant is felt to be a major barrier. This paper assesses the impact of a dedicated robotic transplant team (DART) on program growth and fellowship training at one of the largest robotic transplant programs in North America. METHODS: This is a single center, retrospective review of all robotic operations performed on the transplant surgery service from October 2017 to October 2022. DART was incorporated in February 2020 and included transplant first assists (RFAs), scrub technologists and circulating nurses who received robotic training. Robotic experience before and after DART was compared to assess its impact on program growth and training. RESULTS: Four hundred and two robotic cases were performed by five transplant surgeons: 63 pre-DART and 339 post-DART. 40% of cases were transplant-related and 59.5%, HPB. There was a significant increase in case volume (2.5-10.6 cases/month, p < .0001) and complexity (36.5% vs. 70.3% high complexity cases, p < .0001) post-DART. RFA case coverage increased from 17% to 95%, and participation of transplant fellows as primary surgeons increased from 17% to 95% post-DART period (both p < .05). Conversion rates (9.5% vs. 4.1%) and room turn-around-times (TAT) (58.4 vs. 40.3 min) were lower post-DART (p < .05). There were no emergent conversions, conversions in transplant patients, or robot-related complications in either group. CONCLUSION: OR teams with expertise in robotics and transplant surgery can accelerate growth of robotic transplant programs while maintaining patient safety.

Robotic donor nephrectomy: optimizing outcomes beyond the limitations of laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) has emerged as a safe alternate to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), offering improved visualization, instrument dexterity and ergonomics. There is still concern about how to safely transition from LDN to RDN. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 150 consecutive living donor operations (75 LDN and 75 RDN) at our center, comparing the first 75 RDN's with the last 75 LDN's performed prior to the initiation of the robotic transplant program. Operative times and complications were used as surrogates of efficiency and safety, respectively, to estimate the learning curve with RDN. RESULTS: RDN was associated with a longer total operative time (RDN 182 vs LDN 144 min; P < 0.0001) but a significantly shorter post-operative length of stay (RDN 1.8 vs LDN 2.1 days; P = 0.0213). Donor complications and recipient outcomes were the same between both groups. Learning curve of RDN was estimated to be about 30 cases. CONCLUSIONS: RDN is a safe alternate to LDN with acceptable donor morbidity and no negative impact on recipient outcomes even during the early part of the RDN learning curve. Surgeon preferences for the robotic approach compared to traditional laparoscopy will require further scrutiny to improve ergonomics and operative efficiency.