The Auckland experience with laparoscopic donor nephrectomy

New Zealand Medical Journal

Volumn 116, Issue 1178, 2003, Pages

  Muthu, Carl ^a,b   McCall, John ^a   Windsor, John ^a   Harman, Richard ^a   Dittmer, Ian ^a   Smith, Pat ^a   Munn, Stephen ^a  

^a AUCKLAND CITY HOSPITAL   (New Zealand)

^b NONE   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NONSTEROID ANTIINFLAMMATORY AGENT; OPIATE; PARACETAMOL; TENOXICAM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONVALESCENCE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; FEMALE; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KIDNEY DONOR; KIDNEY FAILURE; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MORBIDITY; NEPHRECTOMY; NEW ZEALAND; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; RECIPIENT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; COST; DONOR; ECONOMICS; LAPAROSCOPY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMANS; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEPHRECTOMY; NEW ZEALAND; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TISSUE DONORS;

EID: 0041829020     PISSN: 11758716     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Roake J. Gifts of life in short supply. NZ Med J 2002;115(1159). URL: http://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/115-1159/126/
2. Russ GR (editor). The twenty fourth report: Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry 2001. Adelaide: ANZDATA Registry, 2001. Available online. URL: http://www.anzdata.org.au/ANZDATA/AnzdataReport/24thReport/00contents.htm Accessed July 2003.
3. Hariharan S, Johnson CP, Bresnahan BA, et al. Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N Engl J Med 2000;342:605-12.
4. Ratner LE, Ciseck LJ, Moore RG, et al: Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 1995;60:1047-9.
5. Merlin TL, Scott DF, Rao MM, et al. The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: a systematic review. Transplantation 2000;70:1659-66.
6. Stifelman M, Hull D, Sosa RE et al. Hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison with the open approach. J Urol 2001;166:444-8.
7. Ruiz-Deya G, Cheng S, Palmer E, et al. Open donor, laparoscopic donor and hand assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a comparison of outcomes. J Urol 2001;166:1270-4.
8. Waller JR, Hiley AL, Mullin EJ et al. Living kidney donation: a comparison of laparoscopic and conventional open operations. Postgrad Med J 2002;78:153-7.
9. Wolf JS Jr, Merion RM, Leichtman AB. Randomized controlled trial of hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open surgical live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 2001;72:284-90.
10. Go PM. Overview of randomized trials in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Semin Laparosc Surg 1998;5:238-41.
11. Pedersen AG, Petersen OB, Wara P, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open appendicectomy. Br J Surg 2001;88:200-5.
12. Flowers JL, Jacob S, Cho E, et al. Comparison of open and laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Ann Surg 1997;226:483-90.
13. Kuo PC, Johnson LB, Sitzmann JV. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with a 23-hour stay: a new standard for transplantation surgery. Ann Surg 2000;231:772-9.
14. Philosophe B, Kuo PC, Schweitzer EJ, et al. Laparoscopic versus open donor nephrectomy: comparing ureteral complications in the recipients and improving the laparoscopic technique. Transplantation 1999;68:497-502.
15. Novotny MJ. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Urol Clin North Am 2001;28:127-34.