Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for a nonfunctioning kidney

Vuk Sekulić; Jovo Bogdanović; Ranko Herin; Senjin Djozić; Mladen Popov

doi:10.2298/VSP170215112S

Vuk Sekulić Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia
Jovo Bogdanović Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia
Ranko Herin Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia
Senjin Djozić Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia
Mladen Popov Clinical Center of Vojvodina, Clinic of Urology, Novi Sad, Serbia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP170215112S

Keywords: nephrectomy;, minimally invasive surgical procedures;, retroperitoneal space.

Abstract

Background/Aim. The minimally invasive laparoscopic nephrectomy was first performed in 1991. The objective of this paper was to present the surgical technique of retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy and to our experience with this procedure in removal of non-functioning kidneys. Methods. This retrospective study enrolled 55 patients who underwent retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy at our institution during the period from January 2011 to November 2016. All patients had a unilateral non-functioning kidney confirmed by intravenous or computed tomography (CT)-urography and renal scintigram. Their medical records were analyzed for demographic data, duration of surgery, average blood loss, duration of hospital stay as well as time to return to normal life activities. Results. The mean age of patients was 43 years (range 23–78). Perioperative or early postoperative mortality was not recorded. Mean operative time was 82 minutes (range 45–210). The average blood loss was 90 mL (40–450). The average hospital stay was 4 days (3–7). Return to life activity was in average after 12 days (9–15). Conclusions. Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy for a non-functioning kidney is a feasible, safe, and effective minimally invasive method. The length of hospital stay and convalescence was shorter than after open nephrectomy.

References

Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, Dierks SM, Merety KS, Darcy MD, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy. N Engl J Med 1991; 324(19): 1370–1.

Kerbl K, Figenshau RS, Clayman RV, Chandhoke PS, Kavoussi LR, Albala DM, et al. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrec-tomy: laboratory and clinical experience. J Endourol 1993; 7(1): 23–6.

Gaur DD. Laparoscopic operative retroperitoneoscopy: use of a new device. J Urol 1992; 148: 1137–9.

Liapis D, de la Taille A, Ploussard G, Robert G, Bastien L, Hoz-nek A, et al. Analysis of complications from 600 retroperito-neoscopic procedures of the upper urinary tract during the last 10 years. World J Urol 2008; 26(6): 523–30.

Gupta NP, Gautam G. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for benign non functioning kidneys. J Minim Access Surg 2005; 1(4): 149–54

Traxer O, Pearle MS. Laparoscopic nephrectomy for benign disease. Semin Laparosc Surg 2000; 7(3): 176–84.

Rassweiler J, Seemann O, Frede T, Henkel TO, Alken P. Retro-peritoneoscopy: experience with 200 cases. J Urol 1998; 160(4): 1265–9.

Rassweiler J, Fornara P, Weber M, Janetschek G, Fahlenkamp D, Henkel TO, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the experience of the laparoscopy working group of the German Urologic Asso-ciation. J Urol 1998; 160(1): 18–21.

Garg M, Singh V, Sinha RJ, Sharma P. Prospective randomized comparison of transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal laparoscopic simplenephrectomy. Urology 2014; 84(2): 335–9.

Quintela RS, Cotta LR, Neves MF, Abelha DL Jr, Tavora JE. Retroperitoneoscopic nephrectomy in benign pathology. Int Braz J Urol 2006; 32(5): 521–8.

Gaur DD. Simple nephrectomy: retroperitoneal approach. J Endourol J Endourol 2000; 14(10): 787–90; discussion 791.

Hemal AK, Talwar M, Wadhwa SN, Gupta NP. Retroperitone-oscopic nephrectomy for benign diseases of the kidney: pro-spective nonrandomized comparison with open surgical ne-phrectomy. J Endourol 1999; 13(6): 425–31.

Gill IS. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy. Urol Clin North Am 1998; 25(2): 343–60.

Rassweiler J, Frede T, Henkel TO, Stock C, Alken P. Nephrecto-my: A comparative study between the transperitoneal and ret-roperitoneal laparoscopic versus the open approach. Eur Urol 1998; 33(5): 489–96.