Comparative analysis of partial versus radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma: Is oncologic safety compromised during nephron sparing in higher stage disease?

Objectives: Over the past 20 years, the utility of partial nephrectomy (PN), compared to radical nephrectomy (RN), for the management of localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has progressively increased, particularly for larger and more complex masses. We sought to compare the recurrence-free survival (RFS) outcomes of PN versus RN in a single-institution cohort. Methods: Between 2002 and 2017, 228 patients underwent RN or PN for lcT1a-T2b, N0M0 RCC at a single tertiary referral center, performed by five surgeons. The clinical end point result was (local or distant) RFS. Univariate and multivariate (cox regression) models were used to evaluate the association between type of surgery (PN vs. RN) and RFS, in the overall cohort and in a subgroup of patients with cT1b. Results: The median age was 59 (interquartile range [IQR] 48-66), and the median tumor size was 4.5 cm (IQR 3-7). There were 128 PN and 100 RN. Over a median follow-up of 4.2 years (IQR 2.2-6.9), the Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant RFS difference between PN and RN (logrank P = 0.53). On multivariate analysis, pathologic stage ≥T2a, Fuhrman Grade ≥3, and chromophobe histology were associated with a worse RFS. PN was not significantly associated with diminished RFS (Hazard ratio [HR] 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-4.3, P = 0.199) in the overall cohort compared to RN. However, in the cT1b subgroup, PN was associated with a significant increase in recurrence compared to RN (HR = 12.4, 95% CI 1.45-133.4, P = 0.038). Conclusions: Our institutional data highlight the possibility of compromise in RFS for clinically localized RCC treated with PN compared to RN, particularly for larger and more complex masses. These data raise concern, especially in light of the nonproven association of survival benefit of PN over RN, warranting future randomized prospective studies for further evaluation.

Adjusting the duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) based on nadir PSA for high risk localized prostate cancer patients treated with definitive external beam radiation therapy and ADT.

BACKGROUND: A nadir Prostate-Specific Antigen (nPSA) of 0.06 ng/mL has been shown to be a strong independent predictor of biochemical recurrence-free survival (bRFS) in patients with intermediate or high-risk (HR) prostate cancer treated with definitive external beam radiation therapy (RT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We aimed to examine the association between the duration of ADT and bRFS in HR localized prostate cancer, based on nPSA. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2015, 204 patients with HR localized prostate cancer were identified. Of them, 157 patients (77.0%) reached the desired nPSA of < 0.06 ng/mL (favorable group), while 47 (23.0%) did not (unfavorable group). Duration of ADT varied among patients depending on physician preference, patient tolerance, and/or compliance. Survival outcomes were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods and predictors of outcomes using multi-variable cox regression model. RESULTS: In the favorable group, ADT for at least 12 months lead to superior bRFS compared to ≤ 9 months of ADT (P = 0.036). However, no significant difference was seen when examining the value of receiving ADT beyond 12, 18, or 24 months, respectively. On univariate analysis for bRFS, the use of ADT for at least 12 months was significant (P = 0.012) as well as time to nadir PSA (tnPSA), (≤ 6 vs > 6 months); (P = 0.043). The presenting T stage was borderline significant (HR 3.074; 95% CI 0.972-9.719; P = 0.056), while PSA at presentation, Gleason Score and age were not. On multivariate analysis, the use of ADT for 12 months (P = 0.012) and tnPSA (P = 0.037) remained significant. In the unfavorable group, receiving ADT beyond 9 and 12 months was associated with improved bRFS (P = 0.044 and 0.019, respectively). However, beyond 18 months, there was no significant difference. CONCLUSION: In HR localized prostate cancer patients treated with definitive RT and ADT, the total duration of ADT may be adjusted according to treatment response using nPSA. In patients reaching a nPSA below 0.06 ng/mL, a total of 12 months of ADT may be sufficient, while in those not reaching a nPSA below 0.06 ng/mL, a total duration of 18 months is required.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but various areas of management still lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The 2021 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) addressed some of these questions to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the voting results from APCCC 2021. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The experts identified three major areas of controversy related to management of advanced prostate cancer: newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), the use of prostate-specific membrane antigen ligands in diagnostics and therapy, and molecular characterisation of tissue and blood. A panel of 86 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 107 pre-defined questions, which were developed by both voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting reflected the opinions of panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients to navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised according to patient characteristics, such as the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), comorbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations, and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Enrolment in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2021 once again identified salient questions that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference is a forum for discussing current diagnosis and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. An expert panel votes on predefined questions focused on the most clinically relevant areas for treatment of advanced prostate cancer for which there are gaps in knowledge. The voting results provide a practical guide to help clinicians in discussing treatment options with patients as part of shared decision-making.

What Experts Think About Prostate Cancer Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Report from the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021.

Patients with advanced prostate cancer (APC) may be at greater risk for severe illness, hospitalisation, or death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to male gender, older age, potential immunosuppressive treatments, or comorbidities. Thus, the optimal management of APC patients during the COVID-19 pandemic is complex. In October 2021, during the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2021, the 73 voting members of the panel members discussed and voted on 13 questions on this topic that could help clinicians make treatment choices during the pandemic. There was a consensus for full COVID-19 vaccination and booster injection in APC patients. Furthermore, the voting results indicate that the expert's treatment recommendations are influenced by the vaccination status: the COVID-19 pandemic altered management of APC patients for 70% of the panellists before the vaccination was available but only for 25% of panellists for fully vaccinated patients. Most experts (71%) were less likely to use docetaxel and abiraterone in unvaccinated patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer. For fully vaccinated patients with high-risk localised prostate cancer, there was a consensus (77%) to follow the usual treatment schedule, whereas in unvaccinated patients, 55% of the panel members voted for deferring radiation therapy. Finally, there was a strong consensus for the use of telemedicine for monitoring APC patients. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2021, the panellists reached a consensus regarding the recommendation of the COVID-19 vaccine in prostate cancer patients and use of telemedicine for monitoring these patients.

Consensus on Prostate Cancer Treatment of Localized Disease With Very Low, Low, and Intermediate Risk: A Report From the First Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference for Developing Countries (PCCCDC).

PURPOSE: A group of international urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on prostate cancer (PCa) in developing countries. The results are reviewed and summarized, and recommendations on consensus statements for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa focused on developing countries were developed. METHODS: A panel of experts developed more than 300 survey questions of which 66 questions concern the principal areas of interest of this paper: very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries. A larger panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create the recommendations for treatment and follow-up for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript. RESULTS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION: The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for treatment for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

Genitourinary Interventions in Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease: Clinical Recommendations for Urologic and Transplant Surgeons.

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease is the fourth most common single cause of end-stage renal disease worldwide with both renal and extrarenal manifestations, resulting in significant morbidity. Approaches to the management of this disease vary widely, with no broadly accepted practice guidelines. Herein, we reviewed the various surgical and interventional management options that are targeted toward treating the symptoms or addressing the resulting kidney failure. Novel treatment modalities such as celiac plexus blockade and renal denervation appear to be promising in pain relief; however, further studies are lacking. Renal cyst decortication seems to have a higher success rate in targeting cyst-related pain compared with aspiration only. In terms of requiring major surgical intervention, such as need and timing of native nephrectomy, there are several considerations when deciding on transplantation with or without a pretransplant native nephrectomy. Patients who are not candidates for native nephrectomy may consider transcatheter arterial embolization. Based on our review of the contemporary indications for genitourinary interventions in the management of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease, we propose an algorithm that depicts the decision-making process on assessing the indications and timing of native nephrectomy in patients with end-stage renal disease awaiting transplant.

A large bi-lobed classic renal angiomyolipoma with vena caval extension.

Renal angiomyolipomas (AMLs) are the most common benign renal tumors encountered, and composed of 3 components: mature adipose tissues, smooth muscles, and blood vessels. Mostly asymptomatic and discovered incidentally, the classic type of AMLs rarely extend to involve great vessels. Radiological confirmation of such lesions is paramount for diagnosis and planned intervention. Management of AMLs is based on clinical presentation and varies from active surveillance to invasive surgical interventions. A case of sizeable classic AML with extension to inferior vena cava is presented here, with successful tumor resection performed after complete liver mobilization. A literature review and a summary of similar cases are also presented. A multidisciplinary approach is required for proper and precise radiological diagnosis to achieve an adequate surgical resection, which might sometimes be complicated and complex, as in this current case.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2019.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in treatments, imaging, and molecular characterisation in advanced prostate cancer have improved outcomes, but there are still many aspects of management that lack high-level evidence to inform clinical practice. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2019 addressed some of these topics to supplement guidelines that are based on level 1 evidence. OBJECTIVE: To present the results from the APCCC 2019. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Similar to prior conferences, experts identified 10 important areas of controversy regarding the management of advanced prostate cancer: locally advanced disease, biochemical recurrence after local therapy, treating the primary tumour in the metastatic setting, metastatic hormone-sensitive/naïve prostate cancer, nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, bone health and bone metastases, molecular characterisation of tissue and blood, inter- and intrapatient heterogeneity, and adverse effects of hormonal therapy and their management. A panel of 72 international prostate cancer experts developed the programme and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 123 predefined questions, which were developed by both voting and nonvoting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Panellists voted based on their opinions rather than a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions had varying degrees of support by the panel, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results reported in the Supplementary material. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results from a panel of prostate cancer experts can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of advanced prostate management for which high-level evidence is sparse. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient-specific factors, such as disease extent and location, prior lines of therapy, comorbidities, and treatment preferences, together with current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic constraints. Clinical trial enrolment for men with advanced prostate cancer should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2019 once again identified important questions that merit assessment in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference, which has been held three times since 2015, aims to share the knowledge of world experts in prostate cancer management with health care providers worldwide. At the end of the conference, an expert panel discusses and votes on predefined consensus questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision making.

Management of urinary tract infection in women: A practical approach for everyday practice.

A common health-care problem worldwide, urinary tract infection (UTI), represents a disease of significant impact on every country's economy, being the most common cause of hospitalization among elderly people and the most common cause of antibiotic prescription in primary care. Diagnosing and managing upper and lower UTI have always been a challenge to physicians, given its high prevalence, risk of recurrence and improper treatment, and the fact of worldwide increase in antibiotic resistance, necessitating implementation of a proper antibiotic stewardship. Urinary infections are twice more likely to occur in females compared to males and its prevalence increases with increasing age. The following is a comprehensive review paper about UTI in females, discussing the various factors leading to a complicated infection. The various etiologies and microbiologies of UTI are also highlighted. In addition to various usual antibiotic regimens for treating UTI, a significant number of nonantimicrobial treatment modalities are highlighted and described in this manuscript, including the novel use of intravesical antibiotics and vaccines for suppression treatment. Finally, a pathway is suggested for the proper diagnosis and treatment that ensures antibiotic stewardship in order to decrease long-term complications.

A review of the possibility of adopting financially driven live donor kidney transplantation

ABSTRACT Kidney transplantation for end-stage renal disease remains the preferred solution due to its survival advantage, enhanced quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The main obstacle worldwide with this modality of treatment is the scarcity of organs. The demand has always exceeded the supply resulting in different types of donations. Kidney donation includes pure living related donors, deceased donors, living unrelated donors (altruistic), paired kidney donation and more recently compensated kidney donation. Ethical considerations in live donor kidney transplantation have always created a debate especially when rewarding unrelated donors. In this paper, we examine the problems of financially driven kidney transplantation, the ethical legitimacy of this practice, and propose some innovative methods and policies that could be adopted to ensure a better practice with accepted ethical guidelines.

A review of the possibility of adopting financially driven live donor kidney transplantation.

Kidney transplantation for end-stage renal disease remains the preferred solution due to its survival advantage, enhanced quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The main obstacle worldwide with this modality of treatment is the scarcity of organs. The demand has always exceeded the supply resulting in different types of donations. Kidney donation includes pure living related donors, deceased donors, living unrelated donors (altruistic), paired kidney donation and more recently compensated kidney donation. Ethical considerations in live donor kidney transplantation have always created a debate especially when rewarding unrelated donors. In this paper, we examine the problems of financially driven kidney transplantation, the ethical legitimacy of this practice, and propose some innovative methods and policies that could be adopted to ensure a better practice with accepted ethical guidelines.

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer: The Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017.

BACKGROUND: In advanced prostate cancer (APC), successful drug development as well as advances in imaging and molecular characterisation have resulted in multiple areas where there is lack of evidence or low level of evidence. The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2017 addressed some of these topics. OBJECTIVE: To present the report of APCCC 2017. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Ten important areas of controversy in APC management were identified: high-risk localised and locally advanced prostate cancer; "oligometastatic" prostate cancer; castration-naïve and castration-resistant prostate cancer; the role of imaging in APC; osteoclast-targeted therapy; molecular characterisation of blood and tissue; genetic counselling/testing; side effects of systemic treatment(s); global access to prostate cancer drugs. A panel of 60 international prostate cancer experts developed the program and the consensus questions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The panel voted publicly but anonymously on 150 predefined questions, which have been developed following a modified Delphi process. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Voting is based on panellist opinion, and thus is not based on a standard literature review or meta-analysis. The outcomes of the voting had varying degrees of support, as reflected in the wording of this article, as well as in the detailed voting results recorded in Supplementary data. CONCLUSIONS: The presented expert voting results can be used for support in areas of management of men with APC where there is no high-level evidence, but individualised treatment decisions should as always be based on all of the data available, including disease extent and location, prior therapies regardless of type, host factors including comorbidities, as well as patient preferences, current and emerging evidence, and logistical and economic constraints. Inclusion of men with APC in clinical trials should be strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2017 again identified important areas in need of trials specifically designed to address them. PATIENT SUMMARY: The second Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference APCCC 2017 did provide a forum for discussion and debates on current treatment options for men with advanced prostate cancer. The aim of the conference is to bring the expertise of world experts to care givers around the world who see less patients with prostate cancer. The conference concluded with a discussion and voting of the expert panel on predefined consensus questions, targeting areas of primary clinical relevance. The results of these expert opinion votes are embedded in the clinical context of current treatment of men with advanced prostate cancer and provide a practical guide to clinicians to assist in the discussions with men with prostate cancer as part of a shared and multidisciplinary decision-making process.

Nadir PSA is a strong predictor of treatment outcome in intermediate and high risk localized prostate cancer patients treated by definitive external beam radiotherapy and androgen deprivation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of tumor characteristics and parameters of treatment response in predicting biochemical disease-free survival (BFS) for patients with intermediate or high risk prostate cancer treated by combined definitive external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). METHODS: Between June 1995 and January 2015, 375 patients with localized prostate cancer and a National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) intermediate or high risk categories were treated by definitive EBRT and ADT. Median duration of androgen blockade was 10 months (range: 3-36 months); Median radiation dose was 72 Gy (Range: 70-78 Gy). Median follow-up time was 5.8 years (range: 0.8-16.39 years). The main study endpoint was biochemical disease free survival (BFS). RESULTS: Forty seven patients (12.5%) developed biochemical recurrence (BCR) during the observation period. Monovariate analysis identified baseline PSA (bPSA) (p = 0.024), T-stage (p = 0.001), Gleason's score (GS) (p = 0.042), radiation dose (p = 0.045), PSA pre-radiation therapy (p = 0.048), and nadir PSA (nPSA), (p < 0.001) as significant variables affecting BCR. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve identified a nPSA of 0.06 ng/ml as optimal cut-off value significantly predicting the patients' risk of BCR (p < 0.001). Multivariate cox regression analysis revealed T-stage, GS, and nPSA as independent variable affecting BFS, while bPSA, age, and radiation dose were not. CONCLUSION: Nadir PSA at 0.06 is a strong independent predictor of BFS in patients with intermediate or high risk prostate cancer treated by definitive EBRT and ADT.

Overview of Dietary Supplements in Prostate Cancer.

Prostate cancer is a key health concern for men with its etiology still under investigation. Recently, the role of dietary supplements has been noted to have a major inhibitory effect on prostate cancer and numerous studies have been conducted in this regard. This review provides a summary on numerous recent studies conducted in this field. Some of the studies reviewed revealed a protective role for supplements, and others showed no correlation while some even had an adverse effect. The mechanism of how these supplements act on the prostate is still not clear. Further studies are warranted especially for supplements that have been shown to have a potential inhibitory role in prostate cancer.

High-dose calcitriol, docetaxel and zoledronic acid in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a phase II study.

INTRODUCTION: Docetaxel has become the standard chemotherapy for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). We wanted to assess the efficacy and safety of a weekly high-dose calcitriol, docetaxel and zoledronic acid combination in CRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients were enrolled to receive calcitriol 0.5 µg/kg orally in 4 divided doses over 4 h on day 1 of each treatment week, docetaxel 36 mg/m(2) i.v. infusion on day 2 of each treatment week and zoledronic acid 4 mg i.v. on day 2 of the first and fifth week of each cycle. Treatment was administered weekly for 6 consecutive weeks on an 8-week cycle. RESULTS: Out of 23 evaluable patients, there was a response of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in 11 patients (47.8%); 6 (26.1%) had a stable PSA level for a median of 4.2 months. The median survival time was 15 months (95% confidence interval 13.9-16.1 months). The regimen was generally tolerated; anemia was the only grade 3/4 hematological toxicity in 2 patients. CONCLUSIONS: This regimen was tolerated, and half of the patients had a PSA response. Although our response rates are inferior to some studies using docetaxel, we believe our response rates are acceptable knowing that we are treating CRPC, which still has variable outcomes.

The impact of prophylactic antiviral agents and statin administration on graft longevity in kidney allograft recipients.

CONTEXT: In an earlier study, we compared the duration of kidney graft survival between two groups of recipients; one on triple (cyclosporine, prednisone and mycophenolate mofetil) and the other on quadruple (cyclosporine, prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil, and sirolimus) immunosuppressive therapy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of antiviral and statin therapy on graft longevity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred five kidney allograft recipients were preoperatively assessed for serological markers of infection with various viral agents. All patients were on a prophylactic antiviral regimen of acyclovir and gancyclovir. Seventeen patients were on a statin. Patients were monitored for viral infections and graft rejection or loss for period of 3 years posttransplantation. RESULTS: We detected a high preoperative prevalence rate of IgG immunoglobulins versus the latency-establishing Herpesviridae viruses. Two patients who were preoperatively IgG positive for CMV had cytomegalovirus disease after transplantation. One patient who was preoperatively IgG positive for VZV had shingles after the surgery. No other confirmed viral infections were reported. Thirteen of 88 patients (14.77%) whose treatment regimen did not include a statin suffered a rejection episode or lost the graft whereas 1 of 17 patients (5.88%) on a statin had a rejection episode. CONCLUSIONS: The low rate of viral infections observed in our study population supports the utility of prophylactic administration of antiviral agents to transplant recipients. However, statins seem to have a protective effect on graft longevity (odds ratio [OR] = 0.361, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.044-2.957).

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: The Middle East experience.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the experience of the Middle East in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), to discuss the associated advantages and salient problems, to examine the learning curve encountered compared with that of the pioneering centres in the West, and the contribution of the regional centres to the worldwide experience. METHODS: We searched Medline and PubMed for all centres performing LDN in the Middle East. Questionnaires were e-mailed to the regional transplantation centres, and programme directors, and leading urological and transplant surgeons were contacted by telephone. RESULTS: LDN in the Middle East was first introduced in 2000; this approach has been pioneered and practised at seven transplant centres within five countries in the region, and was restricted to only three Arab countries, i.e. Lebanon, Egypt and Kuwait. Data collection yielded a total of 888 procedures over one decade, representing only 2% of the total of ≈50,000 transplants during the same period. Despite variability of accurate reporting the overall outcomes were similar to those of open DN. The spectrum of complications was comparable to that from major centres in the USA during their learning curve. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of LDN in the Middle East has been gratifying. The relative hesitancy in introducing LDN in the rest of the Arab Middle East is multifaceted. The advantages conferred to the donor underscore the need for further expansion of this approach for kidney retrieval.