AUTHOR=Vignolini Graziano , Greco Isabella , Sessa Francesco , Gemma Luca , Pecoraro Alessio , Barzaghi Paolo , Grosso Antonio , Corti Francesco , Mormile Nicola , Martiriggiano Marco , Berni Alessandro , Firenzuoli Niccolò , Gacci Mauro , Giancane Saverio , Sebastianelli Arcangelo , Li Marzi Vincenzo , Serni Sergio , Campi Riccardo
TITLE=The University of Florence Technique for Robot-Assisted Kidney Transplantation: 3-Year Experience
JOURNAL=Frontiers in Surgery
VOLUME=7
YEAR=2020
URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/surgery/articles/10.3389/fsurg.2020.583798
DOI=10.3389/fsurg.2020.583798
ISSN=2296-875X
ABSTRACT=Objective: To report the University of Florence technique for robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) from living donor (LD) and deceased donor (DD), highlighting the evolution of surgical indications and technical nuances in light of a single surgeon's learning curve.
Materials and Methods: A dedicated program for RAKT from LDs was developed at our Institution in 2017 and implemented later with a specific framework for DDs. All RAKTs were performed by a single highly experienced surgeon. Data from patients undergoing RAKT between January 2017 and December 2019 were prospectively collected in a dedicated web-based data platform. In this report we provide a comprehensive step-by-step overview of our technique for RAKT, focusing on the potential differences in peri-operative and mid-term functional outcomes between LDs vs. DDs.
Results: Overall, 160 KTs were performed in our center during the study period. Of these, 39 (24%) were performed with a robot-assisted laparoscopic technique, both from LDs (n = 18/39 [46%]) and from DDs (n = 21/39 [54%]). Eleven (11/39 [18%]), 13(13/39 [26%]), and 15 (15/39 [30%]) RAKTs were performed in 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively, highlighting an increasing adoption of robotics for KT over time at our Institution. Median time for arterial (19 min for LD and 18 min for DD groups), venous (21 min for LD, 20 min for DD) and uretero–vesical (18 min for LD and 15 for DD) anastomosis were comparable between the two groups (all p > 0.05), as the median rewarming time (59 min vs. 56 min, p = 0.4). The rate of postoperative surgical complications according to Clavien–Dindo classification did not differ between the two study groups, except for Clavien–Dindo grade II complications (higher among patients undergoing RAKT from DDs, 76 vs. 44%, p = 0.042). Overall, 7/39 (18%) patients (all recipients from DDs) experienced DGF; two of them were on dialysis at last FU.
Conclusions: Our experience confirms the feasibility, safety, and favorable mid-term outcomes of RAKT from both LDs and DDs in appropriately selected recipients, highlighting the opportunity to tailor the technique to specific recipient- and/or graft-characteristics. Further research is needed to refine the technique for RAKT and to evaluate the benefits and harms of robotics for kidney transplantation from DDs.