Dávila SF, Aguilar GJE, Hernández MSI, Valdez LJF, Noyola VH, Hernández CJR, Sánchez GDJ, Rivera CJM

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 186-193
PDF size: 238.84 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: Ascertain whether the histopathological changes in the parts obtained through open and laparoscopic nephrectomy is the same.
Material and methods: Pilot study, longitudinal, comparative, single-blind, done in thirty dogs to be put right nephrectomy; piece to the same procedures that will be held before kidney transplantation in humans. Fifteen pieces were obtained through open technical and fifteen pieces through laparoscopic technique.
Results: There was less frequently and fibrinoid necrosis of fibrin deposits with the laparoscopic technique, with statistically significant difference. There was a lower incidence of edema and tubular capsulitis with laparoscopic technique, without statistically significant differences. There was a higher frequency of perivascular hemorrhage with the laparoscopic technique, with no statistically significant difference. With both techniques was presented the same frequency of thrombosis.
Conclusions: The laparoscopic nephrectomy caused minor renal histopathologic damage.

REFERENCES

1. Marcovich R, Williams AL, Seifman BD, Wolf JS. A canine model to assess the biochemical stress response to laparoscopic and open surgery. J Endourol 2001; 15(10): 1005-8.

2. Monteverde E, Jeanneret V, Giménez F, Guzmán S. Reseña histórica: orígenes de la cirugía laparoscópica. Revista Chilena de Urología 2004; 69(1): 19-24.

3. Ratner LE, Montgomery RA, Maley WR, Cohen C, Burdick J, Chavin KD, Kittur DS, Colombani P, Klein A, Kraus ES, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: the recipient. (see comment). Transplantation 2000; 69(11): 2319-23.

4. Su LM, Ratner LE, Montgomery RA, Jarrett TW, Trock BJ, Sinkov V, Bluebond-Langner R, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: trends in donor and recipient morbidity following 381 consecutive cases. Ann Surg 2004; 240(2): 358-63.

5. Jefferson RH, Burns JR. Urological evaluation of adult renal transplant recipients. J Urol 1995; 153(3 Pt 1): 615-8.

6. Tanabe K, Miyamoto N, Ishida H, Tokumoto T, Shirakawa H, Yamamoto H, Kondo T, Okuda H, Shimmura H, Ishikawa N, Nozaki T, Toma H. Retroperitoneoscopic live donor nephrectomy (RPLDN): establishment and initial experience of RPLDN at a single center. Am J Transplant 2005; 5(4 Pt 1): 739-45.

7. Díaz-Pizarro GJI, Moreno PM, Pacheco GC, Basurto BS, Petersen JES, Ramírez SME. Nefrectomía totalmente laparoscópica para manejo de hidronefrosis en un hospital general. Reporte de caso y revisión de la literatura. Revista Mexicana de Cirugía endoscópica 2001; 2(4): 200-5.

8. Wolfe RA, Ashby VB, Milford EL, Ojo AO, Ettenger RE, Agodoa LY, Held PJ, Port FK. Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant. (see comment). N Engl J Med 1999; 341(23): 1725-30.

9. Saheed MC, Sudhindran S, Bhat SH. Laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy. (comment). BJU Int 2006; 98(5): 1121-2. Comment on: BJU Int 2006; 97(6): 1154-60.

10. Shimizu T, Tanabe K, Ishida H, Toma H, Yamaguchi Y. Histopathological evaluation of 0-h biopsy specimens of donor kidney procured by laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Clin Transplant 2004; 18 Suppl(11): 24-8.