Robotic-assisted laparoscopy living donor nephrectomy: Technique and results of a monocentric retrospective series.

INTRODUCTION: Robot-assisted nephrectomy for living kidney donation (LKD) has been described in the literature as a safe and reproducible technique in high volume centers with extensive robotic surgery experience. Any surgical procedure in a healthy individual ought to be safe in regards to complications. The objective of this study was to evaluate the Robotic-assisted Living Donor Nephrectomy (RLDN) experience in a robotic surgery expert center. METHODS: This is a retrospective study from 11/2011 and 12/2019. In total, 118 consecutive Living Donor (LD) kidney transplants were performed at our institution. All the procedures were performed by robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach. Extraction was performed by iliac (IE), vaginal (VE) or umbilical extraction (UE). The left kidney was preferred even if the vascular anatomy was not modal. RESULTS: For donors: the median operative time was 120min with 50mL of blood loss. The median warm ischemia time was 4min, with a non-significant shorter duration with the UE (4min) in comparison with IE or VE (5min). Nine patients had postoperative complications including 1 grade II (blood transfusion) and 1 grade IIIb (vaginal bleeding after VE). None of our procedures were converted to open surgeries and no deaths were reported. For the recipients: 1.7% presented delayed graft function; their median GFR at 1 year was 61mL/min/1.73m2. CONCLUSION: RLDN in an expert center appears to be a safe technique. The advantages of the robot device in terms of ergonomy don't hamper the surgical outcomes. Donor, recipient and graft survivals seem comparable to the reported laparoscopic outcomes in the literature.

[Introduction of the photoselective vaporization of the prostate in an outpatient setting: Outcomes after the first 100 cases]. / Introduction de la photovaporisation de prostate en ambulatoire : résultats sur les 100 premiers patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to describe the progressive introduction of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) in an academic department of urology in an outpatient care setting and report our outcomes after the first 100 cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Since May 2014, XPS GreenLight™ (Boston Scientific-AMS, USA) PVP in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia was introduced in our department. A prospective local registry was opened to collect patients' demographics, preoperative characteristics and surgical outcomes including operative time, length of stay, catheterization time, and postoperative complications as well as functional outcomes. We also assessed limitations to the outpatient care setting. RESULTS: Conversion to TURP was reported in 6 % for uncontrolled bleeding. Overall, 21 % patients needed more than 1-day catheterization. After 6 months of follow-up, 3 patients (prostate volume 50, 117, and 178mL) had reintervention (second PVP). Ninety days' complications were reported to be up to 6 % (3 urinary obstructions, 1 prostatitis, 1 transfusion and a severe sepsis). After 8 months, an 80 % plateau of outpatient care setting was achieved. Anesthesiologists counter-indicated outpatient care in 59 % of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: A progressive introduction of the PVP in an outpatient care setting is associated with a low complication rate. A plateau was achieved in less than 100 procedures. The major limitation of the outpatient care setting was patients' competitive comorbidities and not disease characteristics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.