Implementation of a One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic to Improve the Efficiency of the Living Kidney Donor Evaluation: Program Report.

Purpose of program: A key barrier to becoming a living kidney donor is an inefficient evaluation process, requiring more than 30 tests (eg, laboratory and diagnostic tests), questionnaires, and specialist consultations. Donor candidates make several trips to hospitals and clinics, and often spend months waiting for appointments and test results. The median evaluation time for a donor candidate in Ontario, Canada, is nearly 1 year. Longer wait times are associated with poorer outcomes for the kidney transplant recipient and higher health care costs. A shorter, more efficient donor evaluation process may help more patients with kidney failure receive a transplant, including a pre-emptive kidney transplant (ie, avoiding the need for dialysis). In this report, we describe the development of a quality improvement intervention to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and patient-centeredness of the donor candidate evaluation process. We developed a One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic, a condensed clinic where interested donor candidates complete all testing and consultations within 1 day. Sources of information: The One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic was developed after performing a comprehensive review of the literature, receiving feedback from patients who have successfully donated, and meetings with transplant program leadership from St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton. A multistakeholder team was formed that included health care staff from nephrology, transplant surgery, radiology, cardiology, social work, nuclear medicine, and patients with the prior lived experience of kidney donation. In the planning stages, the team met regularly to determine the objectives of the clinic, criteria for participation, clinic schedule, patient flow, and clinic metrics. Methods: Donor candidates entered the One-Day Clinic if they completed initial laboratory testing and agreed to an expedited process. If additional testing was required, it was completed on a different day. Donor candidates were reviewed by the nephrologist, transplant surgeon, and donor coordinator approximately 2 weeks after the clinic for final approval. The team continues to meet regularly to review donor feedback, discuss challenges, and brainstorm solutions. Key findings: The One-Day Clinic was implemented in March 2019, and has now been running for 4 years, making iterative improvements through continuous patient and provider feedback. To date, we have evaluated more than 150 donor candidates in this clinic. Feedback from donors has been uniformly positive (98% of donors stated they were very satisfied with the clinic), with most noting that the clinic was efficient and minimally impacted work and family obligations. Hospital leadership, including the health care professionals from each participating department, continue to show support and collaborate to create a seamless experience for donor candidates attending the One-Day Clinic. Limitations: Clinic spots are limited, meaning some interested donor candidates may not be able to enter a One-Day Clinic the same month they come forward. Implications: This patient-centered quality improvement intervention is designed to improve the efficiency and experience of the living kidney donor evaluation, result in better outcomes for kidney transplant recipients, and potentially increase living donation. Our next step is to conduct a formal evaluation of the clinic, measuring qualitative feedback from health care professionals working in the clinic and donor candidates attending the clinic, and measuring key process and outcome measures in donor candidates who completed the one-day assessment compared with those who underwent the usual care assessment. This program evaluation will provide reliable, regionally relevant evidence that will inform transplant centers across the country as they consider incorporating a similar one-day assessment model.

Objectifs du programme: Devenir donneur de rein vivant est difficile, le principal obstacle étant le processus d'évaluation inefficace auquel les candidats doivent se soumettre. Ce processus comporte plus de 30 examens (p. ex. tests de laboratoire et tests diagnostiques), questionnaires et consultations avec des spécialistes. Les candidats donneurs font plusieurs visites dans les hôpitaux et cliniques, et passent souvent plusieurs mois à attendre des rendez-vous et des résultats de tests. En Ontario (Canada), le délai médian pour l'évaluation d'un candidat au don est de près d'un an. Les temps d'attente plus longs sont associés à de moins bons résultats pour les receveurs d'une greffe rénale, ainsi qu'à des coûts de soins de santé plus élevés. Un processus d'évaluation plus court et plus efficace des donneurs potentiels permettrait à un plus grand nombre de patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale de recevoir une greffe, y compris une greffe préventive (c.-à-d. permettant d'éviter la dialyse). Cet article décrit une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité visant à augmenter l'efficience, l'efficacité et la personnalisation du processus d'évaluation des candidats au don. Nous avons développé une clinique d'un jour pour l'évaluation des donneurs de reins vivants (One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic), soit une clinique condensée où les candidats passent tous les tests et consultent un spécialiste dans la même journée. Sources de l'information: La clinique d'un jour pour l'évaluation des donneurs de reins vivants a été développée à la suite d'un examen approfondi de la littérature, de la consultation des commentaires de patients ayant donné avec succès et de rencontres avec les dirigeants du programme de transplantation du St Joseph's Healthcare d'Hamilton. Une équipe multipartite a été formée; celle-ci réunit du personnel soignant en néphrologie, chirurgie de transplantation, radiologie, cardiologie, travail social et médecine nucléaire, ainsi que des patients ayant une expérience vécue du don de rein. L'équipe s'est réunie régulièrement pendant les étapes de planification pour déterminer les objectifs, les paramètres et le calendrier de la clinique, ainsi que les critères de participation et le flux de patients. Méthodologie: Les donneurs potentiels qui avaient complété les tests de laboratoire initiaux et qui acceptaient de se soumettre à un processus accéléré ont été évalués à la clinique d'un jour. Si des tests supplémentaires étaient nécessaires, ceux-ci étaient effectués un autre jour. Les candidats ont été rencontrés par le néphrologue, le chirurgien de transplantation et le coordonnateur des dons environ deux semaines après leur visite à la clinique pour l'approbation finale. L'équipe multipartite continue de se réunir régulièrement pour examiner les commentaires des donneurs, discuter des défis et trouver des solutions. Principaux résultats: La clinique d'un jour, mise sur pied en mars 2019, est en activité depuis quatre ans et permet des améliorations itératives grâce à la rétroaction continue des patients et des soignants. À ce jour, plus de 150 candidats au don ont été évalués à la clinique. Les commentaires des donneurs sont quasi unanimement positifs (98 % des candidats ont déclaré être très satisfaits de la clinique), la plupart soulignant l'efficacité de la clinique et les conséquences minimes du processus sur les obligations professionnelles et familiales. La direction de l'hôpital, tout comme les professionnels de la santé des services participants, continue d'appuyer la clinique d'un jour et de collaborer à la création d'une expérience fluide pour les donneurs potentiels qui la fréquentent. Limites: Les places à la clinique sont limitées; ainsi, certains candidats au don d'un rein vivant pourraient ne pas pouvoir être admis dans le mois où ils se présentent à la clinique. Conclusion: Cette intervention d'amélioration de la qualité axée sur les patients est conçue pour augmenter l'efficacité du processus d'évaluation et bonifier l'expérience des donneurs de rein vivants. Elle vise également à améliorer les résultats des receveurs d'une greffe rénale et, potentiellement, augmenter le don vivant. La prochaine étape sera une évaluation formelle de la clinique, c'est-à-dire la mesure de la rétroaction qualitative des professionnels de la santé qui y travaillent et des candidats au don qui la fréquentent, et l'analyse des processus clés et des résultats des candidats évalués à la clinique d'un jour par rapport à ceux qui suivent le processus d'évaluation habituel. Cette évaluation du programme fournira des données probantes fiables et propres à la région qui pourront informer les centres de transplantation de tout le pays qui envisagent d'intégrer un processus d'évaluation similaire.

Predictors of disease recurrence in high-risk non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients post-surgical resection A single-center, retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 20-40% of kidney cancer patients treated for localized disease experience post-surgical recurrence. Several prognostic models exist to help clinicians determine the risk of distant recurrence, but these models vary in criteria and endpoints. We aimed to examine the recurrence rate and clinicopathologic factors as predictors of recurrence in high-risk renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective chart review of pT3 RCC patients who underwent a nephrectomy between January 2000 and December 2015. Patients registered in clinical trials for adjuvant therapy and those with fewer than three years of followup were excluded. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and univariate and multivariate Cox regression were performed to identify the rate and predictors of disease recurrence. RESULTS: Eighty-eight pT3 RCC patients were included, and 39 patients had recurrence with a median of 23.5 months (range 1.6-127.5). Nine patients had disease recurrence beyond 58 months. Kaplan-Meier log-rank tests identified patients with negative surgical margins and low Fuhrman nuclear grades had greater recurrence-free survival. Univariate Cox regression revealed positive surgical margins, high Fuhrman nuclear grade, and large tumor sizes were significant predictors. In the multivariate Cox regression model, high Fuhrman nuclear grade and positive surgical margins were significant predictors of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Disease recurrence occurred in 44% of pT3-staged patients. High Fuhrman nuclear grade and positive surgical margins were associated with time to recurrence. Physicians should use prognostic models to facilitate conversations about disease recurrence and continue to monitor high-risk patients beyond the recommended five-year followup period. We recommend monitoring pT3 resected patients for up to 10 years post-surgery.

Comparison of a magnetic retrieval device vs. flexible cystoscopy for removal of ureteral stents in renal transplant patients: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Placement of a ureteral stent at the time of renal transplantation can reduce complications when compared to non-stented anastomoses. Removal by flexible cystoscopy can be associated with discomfort, risk for infection, and high costs. New magnetic stents offer a means of bypassing cystoscopy by use of a magnetic retrieval device. Our objective was to compare clinical and cost-related outcomes of conventional and magnetic stents in patients undergoing deceased donor renal transplantation. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either a conventional or a Black-Star® magnetic stent. Clinical, procedural, and cost outcomes were assessed, and the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) was administered with the stent in situ and after stent removal. All variables were compared between groups. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were randomized to conventional (n=19) or Black-Star (n=22) stent. The total time for stent removal under cystoscopy was significantly longer compared to Black-Star removal (6.67±2.47 and 4.80±2.21 minutes, respectively, p=0.019). No differences were found in the USSQ domains between groups. Rates of urinary tract infections and surgical complications between groups were similar. Stent removal was well-tolerated in both groups. Black-Star stent use resulted in a cost savings of $304.02 Canadian dollars (CAD) per case. CONCLUSIONS: USSQ scores suggest that stent removal with the Black-Star magnetic stent is as equally well-tolerated as flexible cystoscopy by renal transplant patients. Black-Star stent removal was significantly faster than conventional stents. No differences in discomfort, infection rate, or complication rate were found. Use of the Black-Star stent resulted in an estimated annual savings of $27 360 CAD at our centre.

A prospective, randomized, pilot trial of a polyethylene glycol (PEG)-coated collagen patch (Hemopatch®) for intraoperative hemostasis during deceased donor renal transplant.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of using a polyethylene glycol (PEG)-coated collagen patch (Hemopatch®) in patients undergoing deceased donor renal transplant. The primary outcome was the amount of intraoperative estimated blood loss in those patients receiving the patch compared to without. Secondary outcomes were the subjective achievement of hemostasis, perigraft collection, and drop in hemoglobin 48 hours postoperatively. METHODS: We performed a single-center, prospective, randomized trial. Patients scheduled to undergo deceased donor renal transplant surgery were randomized to receive the PEG-coated patch or standard hemostasis (i.e., electrocautery and clips). RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were enrolled over 15 months and randomized to receive the PEG-coated patch (n=15) or standard hemostasis (n=15). The mean age was 62.5 years. As determined by the operating surgeon, hemostasis was successfully achieved in all 15 cases using the PEG-coated patch. In the PEG-coated patch group, there was a trend towards less estimated blood loss (237 cc vs. 327 cc; p=0.11) and a lower drop in hemoglobin 48 hours postoperatively (22.27 g/L vs. 29.53 g/L; p=0.09) compared to the standard hemostasis group. Perigraft collection was similar between groups (27% vs. 40%; p=0.43). Subgroup analysis on patients who received anticoagulation therapy revealed no significant difference in blood loss between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Based on our single-center experience, the PEG-coated patch (Hemopatch®) is a safe and feasible option to aid hemostasis during deceased donor renal transplant surgery. Hemostasis was successfully achieved in all cases using the PEG-coated patch.

Renal cell carcinoma in renal allograft: Case series and review of literature.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in transplanted kidneys has been reported sporadically with incidence of about 0.5%. There are currently no standard guidelines on the management of allograft RCC in renal transplant recipients. Our objective was to study effectiveness of nephron-sparing surgery (NSS) for allograft RCC. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with RCC in renal allografts managed with NSS in our institution from January 2000 to December 2015. Patient demographics, interval between transplant and RCC diagnosis, operative parameters, perioperative complications, final pathology, and renal function were evaluated. Three females underwent successful NSS for allograft RCC. Cause of end-stage renal disease was IgA nephropathy in all; mean time between renal transplant and diagnosis of RCC was 23 years. We were able to stay extraperitoneal in all the cases. In the final pathology, two had papillary and one had clear cell RCC. One patient developed pyelocutaneous fistula which was managed by stenting. Long-term functional outcomes of NSS are excellent; none of our patients is dialysis dependent.

Pure laparoscopic unilateral nephrectomy for a patient with a polycystic horseshoe kidney.

A 45-year-old female patient with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) and a horseshoe kidney underwent right laparoscopic nephrectomy. The indication for nephrectomy was to create space within the right iliac fossa for renal transplantation. The operation proceeded as routine for laparoscopic nephrectomy for ADPKD, but was uniquely challenging due to the large size and extensive vasculature of the polycystic horseshoe kidney. In addition to documenting the feasibility of the pure laparoscopic approach for nephrectomy in patients with ADPKD and horseshoe kidney, this case highlights the abnormal location and vasculature encountered when operating on horseshoe kidneys.

Outcomes of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in the presence of multiple renal arteries.

PURPOSE: Data of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) with multiple renal arteries for donor and recipient outcomes were reviewed, with the aim of clarifying whether the laparoscopic approach is safe in the presence of multiple renal arteries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All donor nephrectomies performed at our institution from 2004 to 2008 were reviewed retrospectively. Results were compared between LDN kidneys with multiple arteries and those with a single renal artery. RESULTS: Out of 171 donor nephrectomies, 21 (12%) were performed for kidneys with multiple renal arteries. All of the 150 (88%) donor nephrectomies in the single vessel group were performed laparoscopically. In the multiple artery group, 9 (43%) underwent an open procedure while 12 (57%) underwent a laparoscopic procedure. The warm ischemia time was longer in the multiple artery group than the single artery group, but the difference was not statistically significant (4.25±0.87 min vs. 4.12±0.95 min, respectively). Regarding transplant recipients, the vascular anastomosis time was similar in both groups (30±4.6 min vs. 29.5±3.7 min). The operative blood loss in the transplant recipients was significantly more in the multiple artery group compared to the single artery group (339±292 ml and 130.7±44.8 ml, respectively; P=0.03). The recipient renal function was similar for both the groups at postoperative day 7, 1 month, and at 1 year. CONCLUSION: The data support the fact that the laparoscopic approach to donor nephrectomy in the presence of multiple renal arteries can be performed safely with adequate laparoscopic experience.

A cost-analysis comparison of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus open radical prostatectomy: the McMaster Institute of Urology experience.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to identify and compare the costs of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) at our centre. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of our first 70 consecutive LRP cases and 70 consecutive RRP cases at St. Joseph's Healthcare in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. We performed cost analysis, including operating room costs, disposable instruments, blood transfusions, analgesic requirements and length of hospital stay. Overall expenses were then analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Preoperative patient demographics and disease stages were comparable between the LRP and RRP groups. On a per procedure basis, large discrepancies were found in mean disposable instrument costs (LRP = $659.18 vs. RRP = $236.59), operating room costs (LRP = $4278.00 vs. RRP = $3139.00), mean cost of blood transfusions (LRP = $21.00 vs. RRP = $394.34), mean analgesia requirements (LRP = $12.94 vs. RRP = $41.06) and mean hospital stay bed costs (LRP = $3690.00 vs. RRP = $5027.14). Overall, costs for all patients in the LRP and RRP groups, respectively, were $606 307.29 and $618 721.57 with a cost saving of $12 414.28 in favour of the LRP arm. CONCLUSION: At our institution, we found that LRP costs are slightly less than those for RRP. Higher operative time and disposable instrument expenses are offset by the shorter hospital stays, fewer blood transfusions and less analgesic requirements for the LRP group. Further financial advantages for LRP will likely be achieved with additional reduction of operating room time and by minimizing disposables.

Laparoscopic pyeloplasty: the updated McMaster University experience.

OBJECTIVE: The open Anderson-Hynes procedure has an overall success rate of 90% for ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) was developed to reduce morbidity and hospital stay while preserving the excellent results. We report on the results of our experience with laparoscopic pyeloplasty. METHODS: Between January 2001 and May 2006, 77 consecutive patients underwent LP performed by one of 4 surgeons at our institution. Patients were reassessed with ultrasound (U/S) or intravenous pyelogram (IVP) at 6 weeks. Diuretic renal scan and U/S or IVP were performed at 6 months, and subsequent follow-up included a U/S or IVP as well as clinical assessment. Patients were assessed for pain and hydronephrosis on radiologic imaging, clearance on diuretic renal scan (T(1/2)) and differential renal function. RESULTS: We evaluated 73 patients. The mean patient age was 38 years (range 16-71 yr), the mean operating time was 218 minutes (range 110-409 min), and the mean blood loss was 57 mL (range 25-250 mL). Mean hospital stay was 3.0 days (range 2-7 d). The success rate was 90.4%, and failures were mainly due to poor function after surgery (3 patients). Pyelolithotomy was performed concomitantly on 6 patients, which on average extended operative time by 36 minutes. CONCLUSION: Our success rates are consistent with the LP experience of other centres and are comparable with rates for the open technique. Patients had short hospital stays, and complications were negligible. With experienced surgeons, LP should be the first-line treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Intact specimen extraction in laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures: Pfannenstiel versus expanded port site incisions.

OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic nephrectomy is considered the standard of care for most Stage T1 and T2 renal tumors. Most centers perform intact extraction rather than morcellation. The extraction incision location varies, with no consensus on the best site. We compared the operative and perioperative parameters after transperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures with intact specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel (PFN) or expanded port site (EPS) incision. METHODS: The consecutive charts of 150 patients (March 2001 to October 2003) undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN), laparoscopic nephroureterectomy, or laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with intact specimen extraction were reviewed. The specimens were extracted by way of a PFN or an EPS incision. Two analyses were completed. The first included only LRN, and the second included LRN, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy, and laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. RESULTS: In the LRN-only analysis, the PFN group had a shorter hospital stay (2.84 versus 3.37 days, P <0.05). This group also used significantly less morphine (23.7 versus 47.3 mg, P <0.006). The PFN group in the second analysis also used less morphine (26.3 versus 51.1 mg, P <0.002). Four extraction site complications were found; 1 patient in the PFN group developed cellulitis, and 3 patients in the EPS group developed an incisional hernia. CONCLUSIONS: This evidence suggests reduced morbidity with intact specimen extraction through a PFN incision compared with an EPS incision during laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures. Our practice has been modified on the basis of these data, and all specimens are now removed through a PFN incision when suitable. Urologists should consider PFN incisions for specimen extraction with laparoscopic nephrectomy procedures.

Terminal loop cutaneous ureterostomy in renal transplantation: an under utilized urinary diversion technique.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the effectiveness of terminal loop cutaneous ureterostomy as a means of urinary drainage in kidney transplant recipients during a 20-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five cadaveric and 2 living related patients underwent kidney transplantation with terminal loop cutaneous ureterostomy between 1984 and 2004. These patients had no usable bladder or they were not suitable candidates for intermittent catheterization. RESULTS: Followup was 20 months to 17 years. One patient underwent stomal revision 5 months after renal transplantation. Current serum creatinine 4 years later was 166 mumol/l. The remaining 6 patients had no evidence of ureteral obstruction and rarely had bacteriuria or urinary tract infections. Four patients had a functioning allograft with normal serum creatinine. One patient died with a normally functioning allograft and the remaining patient lost his graft due to chronic rejection. No patient in this series lost the graft due to a urological cause. Overall outcomes included excellent allograft function with minimal infection or stomal stenotic complications. CONCLUSIONS: Terminal loop cutaneous ureterostomy is a simple, safe and alternative means of urinary diversion in patients with renal transplant and a defunctionalized lower urinary tract.

McMaster experience with laparoscopic pyeloplasty.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic pyeloplasty has been developed as a minimally invasive alternative to open pyeloplasty for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). Several series have been published with similar success rates for the two procedures. We present our initial experience with laparoscopic pyeloplasty. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective review of 29 consecutive patients (mean age 37 years) who underwent Laparoscopic dismembered Hynes-Anderson pyeloplasty in our institution between January 2001 to April 2003 was performed. All patients had flank pain with radiologic findings consistent with ureteropelvic junction obstruction and impaired drainage on diuretic renal scan. Patients were assessed at 6 weeks with an ultrasound and assessment of pain, then an intravenous pyelogram (i.v.p.) and diuretic renogram were completed at 6 months along with a repeat clinical assessment. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients underwent the procedure with one patient converted to an open procedure due to difficulties with the anastomosis. Mean operating time was 225 minutes, which decreased with experience. Mean blood loss was 50 cc and no patient required transfusion. Mean hospital stay was 2.5 days. Mean follow-up was 12 months. Twenty-six patients had complete resolution of their pain and an improvement on ultrasound was demonstrated, but only six patients showed improvement in function on i.v.p. or renogram at 6 months. In five patients with 25% or less differential renal function preoperatively, the function was worse or negligible despite complete resolution of symptoms. One patient developed stent migration requiring repositioning and another developed calcification on the distal end of the stent requiring cystolithalopaxy prior to stent removal. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, laparoscopic pyeloplasty offers excellent symptomatic relief in a minimally invasive fashion with low morbidity for adult patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. In patients with borderline function (25% or less) preoperatively and with a normal functioning contralateral kidney, nephrectomy should be a consideration.