Robotic Kidney Transplantation with Regional Hypothermia versus Open Kidney Transplantation for Patients with End Stage Renal Disease: An Ideal Stage 2B Study

被引:28
作者
Ahlawat, Rajesh [1 ]
Sood, Akshay [2 ,3 ]
Jeong, Wooju [2 ]
Ghosh, Prasun [1 ]
Keeley, Jacob [3 ]
Abdollah, Firas [2 ,3 ]
Kher, Vijay [1 ]
Olson, Phil [2 ]
Farah, Guillaume [2 ]
Wurst, Hallie [2 ]
Bhandari, Mahendra [2 ]
Menon, Mani [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Medanta, Kidney & Urol Inst, Gurgaon, India
[2] Henry Ford Hosp, Vattikuti Urol Inst, 2799 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI 48202 USA
[3] Henry Ford Hosp, Vattikuti Urol Inst, VCORE Ctr Outcomes Res, Analyt & Evaluat, Detroit, MI 48202 USA
关键词
minimally invasive surgical procedures; robotics; complications; kidney transplantation; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; SURGICAL SITE INFECTIONS; ALLOGRAFT-REJECTION; LYMPHOCELES; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1097/JU.0000000000001368
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: We report on comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus traditional open kidney transplantation. Materials and Methods: We undertook a prospective cohort study of 654 patients who underwent open or robotic kidney transplantation at a single tertiary care hospital between January 2013 and December 2015. Primary outcome was delayed graft function, defined as the need for dialysis within 1 week of surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, pain, graft rejection, and graft and patient survival. Nonparsimonious propensity score and Ding-VanderWeele analytical methods were used to account for confounding bias. Results: Within the 1:3 matched cohort (robotic 126, open 378; well matched with standardized mean difference similar to 10%), the robotic approach was associated with lower rates of wound infections (0% vs 4%, p=0.023) and symptomatic lymphoceles (0% vs 7% at 36 months, p=0.003), as well as reduced postoperative pain, requirement for narcotic analgesia and blood loss. There were no differences between the 2 groups, robotic versus open, with respect to graft function (delayed graft function 0% vs 2.4%, p=0.081), hospital stay (median 8 days for both, p=0.647), graft rejection (16.2% vs 18.6% at 36 months, p=0.643), and graft (95.2% vs 96.3% at 36 months, p=0.266) and overall survival (94.5% vs 98.1% at 36 months, p=0.307). Ding-VanderWeele analysis suggested minimal influence of unknown confounders on study findings. Conclusions: Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia was associated with a lower rate of postoperative complications and improved patient comfort in comparison to open kidney transplantation. Graft function, and graft and overall survival were comparable between the 2 techniques.
引用
收藏
页码:595 / 602
页数:8
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   Impact of Caseload on Total Hospital Charges: A Direct Comparison Between Minimally Invasive and Open Radical Prostatectomy-A Population Based Study [J].
Abdollah, Firas ;
Budaeus, Lars ;
Sun, Maxine ;
Morgan, Monica ;
Johal, Rupinder ;
Thuret, Rodolphe ;
Zorn, Kevin C. ;
Isbarn, Hendrik ;
Haese, Alexander ;
Jeldres, Claudio ;
Perrotte, Paul ;
Montorsi, Francesco ;
Graefen, Markus ;
Karakiewicz, Pierre I. .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (03) :855-861
[2]   Surgical Innovation and Evaluation 1 Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations [J].
Barkun, Jeffrey S. ;
Aronson, Jeffrey K. ;
Feldman, Liane S. ;
Maddern, Guy J. ;
Strasberg, Steven M. .
LANCET, 2009, 374 (9695) :1089-1096
[3]   Reliability of the visual analog scale for measurement of acute pain [J].
Bijur, PE ;
Silver, W ;
Gallagher, EJ .
ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2001, 8 (12) :1153-1157
[4]   Robotic renal transplantation: first European case [J].
Boggi, Ugo ;
Vistoli, Fabio ;
Signori, Stefano ;
D'Imporzano, Simone ;
Amorese, Gabriella ;
Consani, Giovanni ;
Guarracino, Fabio ;
Melfi, Franca ;
Mussi, Alfredo ;
Mosca, Franco .
TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 24 (02) :213-218
[5]   Robot-assisted Kidney Transplantation: The European Experience [J].
Breda, Alberto ;
Territo, Angelo ;
Gausa, Luis ;
Tugcu, Volkan ;
Alcaraz, Antonio ;
Musquera, Mireia ;
Decaestecker, Karel ;
Desender, Liesbeth ;
Stockle, Michael ;
Janssen, Martin ;
Fornara, Paolo ;
Mohammed, Nasreldin ;
Siena, Giampaolo ;
Serni, Sergio ;
Guirado, Luis ;
Facundo, Carma ;
Doumerc, Nicolas .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2018, 73 (02) :273-281
[6]  
D'Agostino RB, 1998, STAT MED, V17, P2265, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19981015)17:19<2265::AID-SIM918>3.0.CO
[7]  
2-B
[8]   Sensitivity Analysis Without Assumptions [J].
Ding, Peng ;
VanderWeele, Tyler J. .
EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 27 (03) :368-377
[9]   Surgical Innovation and Evaluation 2 Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation [J].
Ergina, Patrick L. ;
Cook, Jonathan A. ;
Blazeby, Jane M. ;
Boutron, Isabelle ;
Clavien, Pierre-Alain ;
Reeves, Barnaby C. ;
Seiler, Christoph M. .
LANCET, 2009, 374 (9695) :1097-1104
[10]   Effect of Minimally Invasive Surgery on the Risk for Surgical Site Infections Results From the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Database [J].
Gandaglia, Giorgio ;
Ghani, Khurshid R. ;
Sood, Akshay ;
Meyers, Jessica R. ;
Sammon, Jesse D. ;
Schmid, Marianne ;
Varda, Briony ;
Briganti, Alberto ;
Montorsi, Francesco ;
Sun, Maxine ;
Menon, Mani ;
Kibel, Adam S. ;
Quoc-Dien Trinh .
JAMA SURGERY, 2014, 149 (10) :1039-1044