Learning curve of kidney transplantation in a high-volume center: A Cohort study of 1466 consecutive recipients

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate surgical outcomes of kidney transplantation (KTX) based on surgeon volume and surgeon experience, and to develop the learning curve model for KTX using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Methods A retrospective review of 1466 consecutive recipients who underwent KTX between 2010 and 2017 was conducted. In total, 51 surgeons, including certified transplant surgeons, transplant fellows and surgical residents were involved in these procedures using a standardized protocol. Outcomes were compared based on surgeon volume (low [1–30] versus high [31≥] volume) and surgeon's type (consultant surgeons, fellows or residents). Results Operative time (129 versus 135 min, P Conclusions Surgical training in KTX using a standardize protocol can be accomplished with a steep learning curve without compromising perioperative outcomes under the careful selection of surgeons and procedures

Learning curve of kidney transplantation in a high-volume center: A Cohort study of 1466 consecutive recipients

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate surgical outcomes of kidney transplantation (KTX) based on surgeon volume and surgeon experience, and to develop the learning curve model for KTX using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Methods: A retrospective review of 1466 consecutive recipients who underwent KTX between 2010 and 2017 was conducted. In total, 51 surgeons, including certified transplant surgeons, transplant fellows and surgical residents were involved in these procedures using a standardized protocol. Outcomes were compared based on surgeon volume (low [1–30] versus high [31≥] volume) and surgeon's type (consultant surgeons, fellows or residents). Results: Operative time (129 versus 135 min, P < 0.001) and warm ischemia time (20.9 versus 24.2 min, P < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the high-volume group, however postoperative outcomes were equal in both groups. The CUSUM analysis revealed that approximately 30 procedures were necessary to improve surgical skills. In addition, no effect of surgeon's type including consultant surgeons, fellows and residents on postoperative outcomes was found. Conclusions: Surgical training in KTX using a standardize protocol can be accomplished with a steep learning curve without compromising perioperative outcomes under the careful selection of surgeons and procedures

Clinical outcome of kidney transplantation after bariatric surgery: A single-center, retrospective cohort study

Patients with class II and III obesity and end-stage renal disease are often ineligible for kidney transplantation (KTx) due to increased postoperative complications and technically challenging surgery. Bariatric surgery (BS) can be an effective solution for KTx candidates who are considered inoperable. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of KTx after BS and to compare the outcomes to obese recipients (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2) without BS. This retrospective, single-center study included patients who received KTx after BS between January 1994 and December 2018. The primary outcome was postoperative complications. The secondary outcomes were graft and patient survival. In total, 156 patients were included, of whom 23 underwent BS prior to KTx. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. After a median follow-up of 5.1 years, death-censored graft survival, uncensored graft survival, and patient survival were similar to controls (log rank test p =.845,.659, and.704, respectively). Dialysis pre-transplantation (Hazard Ratio (HR) 2.55; 95%CI 1.03–6.34, p =.043) and diabetes (HR 2.41; 95%CI 1.11–5.22, p =.027) were independent risk factors for all-cause mortality. A kidney from a deceased donor was an independent risk factor for death-censored graft loss (HR 1.98; 95%CI 1.04–3.79, p =.038). Patients who received a KTx after BS have similar outcomes as obese transplant recipients

Robot-assisted kidney transplantation as a minimally invasive approach for kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) has emerged as an alternative for kidney transplant recipients with the potential benefits of minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the clinical outcomes of RAKT with open kidney transplantation (OKT). METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane databases were systematically searched. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were collected, as well as long-term renal function and data on graft and patient survival. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included, which compared 482 RAKT procedures with 1316 OKT procedures. RAKT was associated with lower a risk of surgical site infection (Risk ratio (RR) = 0.15, p < 0.001), symptomatic lymphocele (RR = 0.20, p = 0.03), less postoperative pain (Mean difference (MD) = -1.38 points, p < 0.001), smaller incision length (MD = -8.51 cm, p < 0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (MD = -1.69 days, p = 0.03) compared with OKT. No difference was found in renal function, graft, and patient survival. CONCLUSIONS: RAKT is a safe and feasible alternative to OKT with less surgical complications without compromising renal function, graft and patient survival

Bariatric surgery before and after kidney transplant: a propensity score–matched analysis

Background: Obesity is becoming more prevalent in the end-stage renal disease population. Bariatric surgery (BS) is increasingly considered as an approach to become eligible for kidney transplant (KT) or reduce obesity-related morbidities. Objectives: To assess the short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent both BS and KT and to determine the optimal timing of BS. Methods: Patients who underwent both KT and BS between January 2000 and December 2020 were included and stratified according to the sequence of the 2 operations. The primary outcomes were patient and graft survival. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and efficacy of weight loss. Results: Twenty-two patients were included in the KT first group and 34 in the BS first group. Death-uncensored graft survival in the KT first group was significantly higher than in the BS first group (90.9% versus 71.4%, P = .009), without significant difference in patient survival and death-censored graft survival (100% versus 90.5%, P = .082; 90.9% versus 81.0%, P = .058). There was no significant difference in 1-year total weight loss (1-yr TWL: median [interquartile range {IQR}], 36.0 [28.0–42.0] kg versus 29.6 [21.5–40.6] kg, P = .424), 1-year percentage of excess weight loss (1-yr %EWL: median [IQR], 74.9 [54.1–99.0] versus 57.9 [47.5–79.4], P = .155), and the incidence of postoperative complications (36.4% versus 50.0%, P = .316) between the KT first and BS first groups. Conclusion: Both pre- and posttransplant BS are effective and safe. Different conditions of each transplant candidate should be considered in detail to determine the optimal timing of BS