Corrigendum: Donor Size Doesn't Impact En Bloc Kidney Transplant Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10731.].

Donor Size Doesn't Impact En Bloc Kidney Transplant Outcomes: A Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature.

Few transplant programs use kidneys from donors with body weight (BW)<10 kg due to higher incidence of vascular and urological complications, and DGF. The purpose of this study was to investigate the non-inferiority of pediatric en bloc kidneys from donors with BW<10 kg. We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of en bloc kidney transplants from pediatric donor cohort (n = 46) from 2003 to 2021 and stratified the outcomes by donor BW (small group, donor BW<10 kg, n = 30; standard group, donor BW<10 kg, n = 16). Graft function, rate of early post-transplant complications, graft and patient survival were analyzed. Complication rates were similar between both groups with 1 case of arterial thrombosis in the smaller group. Overall graft and patient survival rates were similar between the small and the standard group (graft survival-90% vs. 100%, p = 0.09; patient survival-96.7 vs. 100%, p = 0.48). Serum creatinine at 1, 3, 5 years was no different between groups. Reoperation rate was higher in the small group (23.3% vs. 6.25%, p = 0.03). The allograft from small donors could be related to higher reoperation rate in the early post-transplant period, but not associated with lower long-term graft and patient survival.

Virtual Surgical Skills Training in a High School Summer Program.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted components of traditional education with shifts toward virtual platforms. This report describes the virtual approach to basic surgical skills training during a high school program in the summers of 2020 and 2021. METHODS: Two 2-week sessions were held by Zoom (Zoom Video Communications) with 99 students in 2020 and 198 students in 2021. Each student was sent surgical supplies and instruments. Interactive lectures were held each morning, and basic surgical skills instruction was provided each afternoon. After the session, survey links were distributed to students to complete an anonymous 37-item questionnaire regarding surgical skills confidence, simulation kit satisfaction, and technical difficulties. RESULTS: Of the 297 students, 270 (90.9%) completed the questionnaire, including 91 (91.9%) in 2020 and 179 (90.4%) in 2021. On a scale of 1 (fair) to 5 (excellent), students in 2020 and 2021 reported similar confidence in instrument handling (4-5: 90.0% vs 86.3%; P = .38), suturing skin (4-5: 88.9% vs 82.8%; P = .19), and thoracic aorta suturing (4-5: 73.3% vs 73.6%; P = .97). Students reported greater confidence in 2020 in knot tying (4-5: 98.9% vs 87.9%; P = .002), coronary vessel suturing (4-5: 82.2% vs 65.5%; P < .001), and valve model suturing (4-5: 68.5% vs 50.3%; P = .005) than students in 2021. Students had similar satisfaction rates with the program (extremely or somewhat satisfied: 92.3% vs 86.0%; p = .51) between 2020 and 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual education carries the potential for basic surgical skills training for a more widespread audience with less access to direct surgical education. Further research is needed to optimize teaching finer surgical skills.