Robotic living donor nephrectomy is associated with reduced post-operative opioid use compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic approach.

Donor nephrectomy Kidney transplantation Living donation Opioids Pain management Robotic surgery

Journal

Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
22 May 2024
Historique:
received: 12 02 2024
accepted: 05 05 2024
medline: 23 5 2024
pubmed: 23 5 2024
entrez: 22 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) has emerged as a safe alternative to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Having previously demonstrated comparable efficacy, this study aims to examine postoperative analgesia use (opioid and non-opioid) in the two groups. We conducted a retrospective review of 300 living donor nephrectomies performed at our center, comparing 150 RDN's with a contemporary cohort of 150 hand-assisted LDN's. In addition to clinical and demographic information, data on postoperative inpatient opioid and non-opioid analgesia (from patient's arrival to the surgical floor after surgery till the time of discharge) was collected. Opioid dosages were standardized by conversion to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). All patients were managed post-operatively under a standardized ERAS pathway for living donor nephrectomy patients. There were no significant differences in donor age, gender, and BMI between RDN and LDN groups. Total post-operative opioid use (MME's) was significantly lower in RDN patients (RDN 27.1 vs. LDN 46.3; P < 0.0001). Breakdown of opioid use with post-operative (POD) day demonstrated significantly lower use in RDN group on POD1 (RDN 8.6 vs. LDN 17.0; P < 0.05), and POD2 (RDN 3.9 vs LDN 10; P < 0.05). RDN patients had a shorter post-operative length of stay (LOS) (RDN 1.69 days vs. LDN 1.98; P = 0.0003). There were no differences between groups in non-opioid medication use, complications, and readmission rates. RDN has comparable safety to hand-assist LDN and offers additional benefits of lower postoperative opioid requirement and a shorter hospital LOS.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Robotic donor nephrectomy (RDN) has emerged as a safe alternative to laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). Having previously demonstrated comparable efficacy, this study aims to examine postoperative analgesia use (opioid and non-opioid) in the two groups.
METHODS METHODS
We conducted a retrospective review of 300 living donor nephrectomies performed at our center, comparing 150 RDN's with a contemporary cohort of 150 hand-assisted LDN's. In addition to clinical and demographic information, data on postoperative inpatient opioid and non-opioid analgesia (from patient's arrival to the surgical floor after surgery till the time of discharge) was collected. Opioid dosages were standardized by conversion to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). All patients were managed post-operatively under a standardized ERAS pathway for living donor nephrectomy patients.
RESULTS RESULTS
There were no significant differences in donor age, gender, and BMI between RDN and LDN groups. Total post-operative opioid use (MME's) was significantly lower in RDN patients (RDN 27.1 vs. LDN 46.3; P < 0.0001). Breakdown of opioid use with post-operative (POD) day demonstrated significantly lower use in RDN group on POD1 (RDN 8.6 vs. LDN 17.0; P < 0.05), and POD2 (RDN 3.9 vs LDN 10; P < 0.05). RDN patients had a shorter post-operative length of stay (LOS) (RDN 1.69 days vs. LDN 1.98; P = 0.0003). There were no differences between groups in non-opioid medication use, complications, and readmission rates.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
RDN has comparable safety to hand-assist LDN and offers additional benefits of lower postoperative opioid requirement and a shorter hospital LOS.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38777895
doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10925-5
pii: 10.1007/s00464-024-10925-5
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Références

Rocca X, Espinoza O, Hidalgo F, Gonzalez F (2005) Laparoscopic nephrectomy: safe and comfortable surgical alternative for living donors and for good results of graft function. Transplant Proc 37:3349–3350
doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.09.140 pubmed: 16298592
Axelrod DA, Schnitzler MA, Xiao H, Irish W, Tuttle-Newhall E, Chang S-H, Kasiske BL, Alhamad T, Lentine KL (2018) An economic assessment of contemporary kidney transplant practice. Am J Transplant 18:1168–1176
doi: 10.1111/ajt.14702 pubmed: 29451350
Ratner LE, Ciseck LJ, Moore RG, Cigarroa FG, Kaufman HS, Kavoussi LR (1995) Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Transplantation 60:1047–1049
pubmed: 7491680
Yuan H, Liu L, Zheng S, Yang L, Pu C, Wei Q, Han P (2013) The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy for renal transplantation: an updated meta-analysis. Transplant Proc 45:65–76
doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.07.152 pubmed: 23375276
Rodríguez-Sanjuán JC, Gómez-Ruiz M, Trugeda-Carrera S, Manuel-Palazuelos C, López-Useros A, Gómez-Fleitas M (2016) Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: Present and future directions. World J Gastroenterol 22:1975–2004
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i6.1975 pubmed: 26877605 pmcid: 4726673
Olumba FC, Vachharajani N, Yu J, Scherer M, Matson S, Hill AL, Kiani A, Lin Y, Doyle MMB, Chapman WC, Wellen JR, Khan AS (2023) Robotic donor nephrectomy: optimizing outcomes beyond the limitations of laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 37:7511–7519
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10246-z pubmed: 37415014
Wang H, Chen R, Li T, Peng L (2019) Robot-assisted laparoscopic vs laparoscopic donor nephrectomy in renal transplantation: a meta-analysis. Clin Transplant 33:e13451
doi: 10.1111/ctr.13451 pubmed: 30461073
Bhattu AS, Ganpule A, Sabnis RB, Murali V, Mishra S, Desai M (2015) Robot-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy vs standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a prospective randomized comparative study. J Endourol 29:1334–1340
doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0213 pubmed: 26414847
Papa S, Popovic A, Loerzel S, Iskhagi S, Gallay B, Leggat J, Saidi R, Hod Dvorai R, Shahbazov R (2023) Laparoscopic to robotic living donor nephrectomy: is it time to change surgical technique? Int J Med Robot 19:e2550
doi: 10.1002/rcs.2550 pubmed: 37452584
Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R (2016) CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain—United States, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep 65:1–49
doi: 10.15585/mmwr.rr6501e1 pubmed: 26987082
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibañes E, Pekolj J, Slankamenac K, Bassi C, Graf R, Vonlanthen R, Padbury R, Cameron JL, Makuuchi M (2009) The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187–196
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2 pubmed: 19638912
Batley SE, Prasad V, Vasdev N, Mohan-S G (2016) Post-operative pain management in patients undergoing robotic urological surgery. Curr Urol Rep 9:5–11
doi: 10.1159/000442843
Chiu L-H, Chen C-H, Tu P-C, Chang C-W, Yen Y-K, Liu W-M (2015) Comparison of robotic surgery and laparoscopy to perform total hysterectomy with pelvic adhesions or large uterus. J Minim Access Surg 11:87–93
doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.147718 pubmed: 25598606 pmcid: 4290126
Betcher RE, Chaney JP, Lacy PR, Otey SK, Wood DJ (2014) Analysis of postoperative pain in robotic versus traditional laparoscopic hysterectomy. J Robot Surg 8:35–41
doi: 10.1007/s11701-013-0418-z pubmed: 27637237
Jin S-J, Park J-Y, Kim D-H, Yoon S-H, Kim E, Hwang J-H, Song C, Kim Y-K (2017) Comparison of postoperative pain between laparoscopic and robot-assisted partial nephrectomies for renal tumors: a propensity score matching analysis. Medicine 96:e7581
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007581 pubmed: 28723795 pmcid: 5521935
Mangalath AS, Kumar L, Sawant AB, Kesavan R, Ravindran G, Sunil R (2021) Comparison of analgesic requirements in robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic abdominal surgeries. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 37:79–84
doi: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP_354_18 pubmed: 34103828 pmcid: 8174415
Martino MA, Shubella J, Thomas MB, Morcrette RM, Schindler J, Williams S, Boulay R (2011) A cost analysis of postoperative management in endometrial cancer patients treated by robotics versus laparoscopic approach. Gynecol Oncol 123:528–531
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2011.08.021 pubmed: 21968341
Byrne MHV, Mehmood A, Summers DM, Hosgood SA, Nicholson ML (2021) A systematic review of living kidney donor enhanced recovery after surgery. Clin Transplant 35:e14384
doi: 10.1111/ctr.14384 pubmed: 34101263

Auteurs

Amen Z Kiani (AZ)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA. amen@wustl.edu.
Department of Surgery, Division of Abdominal Transplant Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 Euclid Ave St., Louis, MO, 63110, USA. amen@wustl.edu.

Kristin Progar (K)

Department of Pharmacy, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, Barnes-Jewish Hospital Plaza, Saint Louis, MO, 63130, USA.

Angela L Hill (AL)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Neeta Vachharajani (N)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Franklin Olumba (F)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Jennifer Yu (J)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

William C Chapman (WC)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Majella B Doyle (MB)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Jason R Wellen (JR)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Adeel S Khan (AS)

Section of Abdominal Transplant, Department of General Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.

Classifications MeSH