Comparison of three perioperative fluid regimes for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy : A prospective randomized dose-finding study.

BACKGROUND: Pneumoperitoneum (PP), as used for laparoscopic procedures, impairs stroke volume, renal blood flow, glomerular filtration rate and urine output. This study investigated whether perioperative fluid management can abolish these negative effects of PP on hemodynamics. METHODS: Twenty-one patients undergoing laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) were randomized into three groups: group 1 received overnight infusion and received a bolus of colloid before induction of anesthesia, followed by a bolus just before PP; group 2 received overnight infusion and a colloid bolus before anesthesia; group 3 served as controls and received only infusion during operation. All three groups received the same total amount of crystalloids and colloids until nephrectomy. Data analysis of the donor included; mean arterial pressure (MAP), stroke volume (SV), left ventricular ejection time (LVETc), perioperative urine output and renal function measured as the creatinine clearance (CrCl) until one-year post-operative. RESULTS: SV was significantly higher in group 1 compared to controls for all measurements. In the control group SV significantly decreased after changing from the supine to lateral position whereas there was no change in SV in both pre-hydrated groups. In all groups, MAP decreased after induction of anesthesia, and restored to pre-anesthetic values during PP. CrCl decreased in the control group during PP, but not in the other groups. From two days postoperative, CrCl was comparable between the three study groups. CONCLUSION: Overnight infusion and a bolus of colloid just before PP attenuate hemodynamic compromise from PP.

Beneficial effects of a new fluid regime on kidney function of donor and recipient during laparoscopic v open donor nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) has been associated with delayed graft function compared with open donor nephrectomy (ODN). We have recently shown that the adverse effect of pneumoperitoneum (PP) on hemodynamics could be prevented by a new fluid regime. The aim of this study was to test the effect of this fluid regime on the kidney function of the donor and recipient after LDN and ODN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data of 51 donors undergoing ODN and 59 donors undergoing LDN as well as data from the corresponding recipients. All donors and recipients were treated with a standardized anesthesia and fluid regime. This fluid regime consisted of preoperative overnight hydration together with a bolus of colloid administered before induction of anesthesia and before introduction of PP. Follow-up was 2 years. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. Hemodynamics and urine output until nephrectomy were comparable between both groups. Donor kidney function did not differ after ODN and LDN. Estimated glomerular filtration rate, graft survival, and recipient survival did not differ between open and laparoscopically procured transplants. No adverse effects of the novel fluid regime (eg, pulmonary edema or additional oxygen supply) were observed in the donors. CONCLUSION: In contrast to our earlier findings, the kidney function of the donor and recipient is comparable between ODN and LDN after introduction of a new fluid regime.

Comparison of laparoscopic and mini incision open donor nephrectomy: single blind, randomised controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the best approach for live donor nephrectomy to minimise discomfort to the donor and to provide good graft function. DESIGN: Single blind, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Two university medical centres, the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: 100 living kidney donors. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic donor nephrectomy or to mini incision muscle splitting open donor nephrectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was physical fatigue using the multidimensional fatigue inventory 20 (MFI-20). Secondary outcomes were physical function using the SF-36, hospital stay after surgery, pain, operating times, recipient graft function, and graft survival. RESULTS: Conversions did not occur. Compared with mini incision open donor nephrectomy, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy resulted in longer skin to skin time (median 221 v 164 minutes, P < 0.001), longer warm ischaemia time (6 v 3 minutes, P < 0.001), less blood loss (100 v 240 ml, P < 0.001), and a similar number of complications (intraoperatively 12% v 6%, P = 0.49, postoperatively both 6%). After laparoscopic nephrectomy, donors required less morphine (16 v 25 mg, P = 0.005) and shorter hospital stay (3 v 4 days, P = 0.003). During one year's follow-up mean physical fatigue was less (difference - 1.3, 95% confidence interval - 2.4 to - 0.1) and physical function was better (difference 6.2, 2.0 to 10.3) after laparoscopic nephrectomy. Function of the graft and graft survival rate of the recipient at one year censored for death did not differ (100% after laparoscopic nephrectomy and 98% after open nephrectomy). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy results in a better quality of life compared with mini incision open donor nephrectomy but equal safety and graft function.