Zafar Zaidi ( The Indus Hospital, C-76, Sector 31/5, Korangi Crossing, Korangi, Karachi )
Lubna Samad ( The Indus Hospital, C-76, Sector 31/5, Korangi Crossing, Korangi, Karachi )
Shahid Aquil ( The Indus Hospital, C-76, Sector 31/5, Korangi Crossing, Korangi, Karachi )
July 2007, Volume 57, Issue 7
Original Article
Abstract
Introduction
Patients and Methods
Between May 2003 and May 2006, 60 laparoscopic nephrectomies were performed by a single surgeon. Surgical Technique: Since majority of the cases in this series are done via the retroperitoneal route and it is ourpreferred route, hence surgical details of this procedure are described. The procedure is performed under general anaesthesia with end tidal CO2 monitoring. Intravenous antibiotics are routinely administered. After bladder catheterization the patient is placed in the standard lateral kidney position. The authors always use the open (Hasson)8 technique for obtaining initial access. A10 -12 mm incisionis made in the lumbar (Petit's) triangle below the 12th rib atthe lateral border of paraspinalis muscles. The muscle fibresare gently separated and entry is gained into theretroperitoneum by gently piercing the thora columbarfascia with the tip of an artery forceps. Ahome made balloon dilator is constructed as described by Gaur.9Thisconsists of a glove finger stall tied by silk over the end of asuction catheter. The balloon dilator is then inserted into the opening. Distension of the balloon with air rapidly and atraumatically displaces the adjacent fat and peritoneum,there by creating an adequate working space for laparoscopic surgery within that area. A10 mm port is thenplaced in this opening for the laparoscope. All work isvisualized via a monitor at the head of the table using a high quality charge-couple device (CCD) camera connected tothe laparoscope. The 2nd and 3rd ports are inserted under direct vision as shown in Figure 1. An automatic insufflatoris used to maintain the CO2 pressure at 15 mm Hg. ThePsoas muscle acts as a landmark and should be sought. Inthe retroperitoneal approach, the posterior aspect of the kidney is reached first and the pulsating renal artery is identified at the hilum. The renal hilum is dissected, renalvein and renal artery cleaned of fat and clipped using LigaClips 400 series™ (Ethicon). Endo GIAif available canalso be used. Three clips are applied on the proximal part ofthe vessel and 2 on the distal end.10The vessels are dividedand then further dissection of the kidney is performed separating it from the surrounding fat. The ureter is clippedand divided and once the kidney is fully mobilized it isremoved from the body by incising one of the port sites andincreasing it to 2.5-3 cm. Adrain is always left in there troperitoneum and CO2 evacuated before the end of theprocedure.If the kidney is hydronephrotic, it is aspirated to geta wider working space and to facilitate grasping of kidneytissue. Laparoscopically guided percutaneous need leaspiration is performed. This minimizes the spillage in there troperitoneal space obviating the frequent use of suction,loss of pneumoperitoneum and subsequent delays.
[(1)]
Specimen removal is by increasing the opening of aport to allow delivery of the specimen. Endo catch bag is not used due to cost of the device.Foleys catheter is removed within 24 hours and oral feeding started after 12 to 18 hours after confirming returnof bowel sounds. Patient is fully mobilized within 24 hoursafter which the drain is removed.
Results
In our series of 60 patients, 50 laparoscopic nephrectomies were done via the retroperitoneal route while10 nephrectomies were performed via the transadominalroute. The mean age of patients was 18.5 +16.6 years (2-60years). There were 37 males and 23 females. Right sided nephrectomy was performed in 31 cases while left kidney was removed in 29 cases. The indications for nephrectomy are given in Table 1. Mean operating time for laparoscopic nephrectomy alone was 140 +51.1 min (range 25-300 minutes).Nineteen additional surgical procedures were performed in21 patients under the same general anaesthesia and are detailed in Table 2 (some patients had more than one additional procedure).The mean size of kidney removed was 7.4 +3.13 cm
Table 1. Indications for Nephrectomy.
| Indication for Nephrectomy | Number | Percentage |
| Stones | 29 | 48% |
| Dysplasia | 11 | 18.3% |
| Chronic pyelonephritis | 8 | 13% |
| Pelviureteric junction obstruction | 4 | 6.6% |
| Tuberculosis | 3 | 5% |
| Vesicoureteric reflux | 3 | 5% |
| Ureterocele | 2 | 3.3% |
| Total | 60 |
Table 2. Additional Procedures.
Additional Procedures
| Ureteric Reimplant (contra lateral) | 3 |
| Augmentation Ureterocystoplasty (ipsi lateral ureter) | 2 |
| Mitrofanoff appendicovesicostomy | 2 |
| Ureterorenoscopy (contra lateral) and stone removal | 3 |
| Bladder stone removal | 2 |
| Ureteric stent insertion (contra lateral) | 2 |
| Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (contra lateral) | 1 |
| Bladder neck incision | 1 |
| Closure vesicostomy | 1 |
| Ureterocele incision | 1 |
| Cystoscopy | 1 |
| Total | 19 |
(4.6-15.9 cm). Histopathological examination of 4 kidney srevealed Xanthogranulomatous Pyelonephritis (XGP).The mean hospital stay for all the patients was 3.1 +2.3 days how ever the mean hospital stay for those patientswho underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy without any additional procedure was 2.2 +0.92 days (range 1.5 - 4days).Complications were seen in 2 patients (3%). One patient had a wound infection secondary to spillage of pusin the retroperitoneal cavity while one child required re-exploration of wound due to a haematoma from the cutureteric end. He was diagnosed to have IdiopathicThrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP). Conversion to open nephrectomy was performed in 7 patients (11.6%), 4patients (6%) had bleeding from renal pedicle necessitatingopen conversion, 2 patients (3%) had open conversion due to excessive pus in the kidney which had spilled in there troperitoneum resulting in poor visualization. In one patient there was failure to progress. She had a longstanding indwelling percutaneous nephrostomy and it was impossible to dissect around it. There was no mortality andnone of the patients had prolonged ileus. Blood transfusion was not required in any case. There was no bowel injury orport site herniation.
Discussion
Conclusion
Acknowledgement
References
1. Bartel M: Die Retroperitoneoscopy; Eine endoskopiche methode zur inspektion and bioptischen untersuchung des retroperitonealen raumes. Zentralbl Chir .1969; 94 : 377
2. Wickham JEA (ed). The surgical treatment of renal lithiasis. In Urinary calculus disease. New York, Churchill Livingstone, 1979; pp 145-98.
3. Bay-Nielse H, Schultz A. Endoscopic retroperitoneal removal of stones from the upper half of the ureter. Scand. J.Urol. Nephrol.1982;16: 227-8.
4. Coptcoat MJ. Endoscopic tissue liquisation of the prostate , bladder and kidney: preliminary report. Thesis, Liverpool University , 1990.
5. Whickam JEA, Miller RA. Percutaneous renal access. In Percutaneous Renal Surgery. Edited by JEA Whickam. New York: Churchill Livingstone 1983, pp. 33-39.
6. Weiberg JJ, Smith AD. Percutaneous resection of the kidney; preliminary report. J. Endourol. 1988; 2:355.
7. Clayman RV, Kavoussi LR, Soper NJ, Dierks SM, Merety RS, Darcy MD, et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J Urol 1991; 146: 278-82.
8. Gill IS, Grune MT, Munch LS: Access technique for retroperitoneoscopy. J Urol, 1996: 156;1120-4.
9. Gaur DD: Laparoscopic operative retroperitoneoscopy : Use of a new device. J Urol 1992 ;148:1137-9.
10. Hemal AK, Mandal S, Kumar R. Cost reductive laparoscopic nephrectomy: In Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery, Hemal Ak (eds), New Delhi, BI Churchill Livingstone; 2000, pp 171-74.
11. Rassweiler JJ, Seemann O, Frede T, Henkel TO, Alken P. Retroperitoneoscopy: Experience with 200 cases. J Urol 1998; 160: 1265-9.
12. Gill IS. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy. Urol Clin North Amer. 1998; . 25: 343-60.
13. Ono Y, Katoh N, Kinukawa T, Matsuura O, Ohshima S. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: The Nagoya experience. J Urol 1997; 158: 719-23.
14. Keely FX, Tolley DA. A Review of our first 100 cases of laparoscopic nephrectomy: Defining risk factors for complications. Br J Urol.1998; 82: 615-8.
15. Eraky I, El-Kappany HA, Ghoneim MA. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: Mansoura experience with 106 cases. Br J Urol. 1995; 75: 271-5.
16. Sharma NK, Stephenson R, Tolley DA. Should laparoscopic nephrectomy /
nephroureterectomy be the preferred treatment option for most renal pathologies? A comparative study. J Urol ; 1996 : 155: 491A, Abstract 722.
17. Wilson BG, Deans GT, Kelly J, McCrory D. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial experience and cost implications. Br J Urol.1995; 75: 276-80.
18. Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Clayman RV, Ehrlich R, Evans R, Fuchs G et al. Complications of Laparoscopic nephrectomy in 185 patients: A multiinstitutional review. J Urol. 1995; 154: 479-83.
19. Fahlenkamp D, Rassweiler J, Fornara P, Frode T, Loening SA. Complications of laparoscopic procedures in urology: Experience with 2,407 procedures at 4
German centers. J Urol.1999; 162: 765-70.
20. Poulsen EU, Eddy B, Poulsen J. Laparoscopic nephrectomy. Scand J Urol Nephrol.2005; 39: 138-42.
21. Nadu A, Mor Y, Chen J, Ramon J, Soter M, Golomb J. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial experience in Israel with 110 cases. Isr Mod Assoc J.2005;7:431-4.
22. Peters CA. Complications in paediatric urological laparoscopy: results of a survey. J Urol. 1996; 155: 1070-3.
Vol. 57, No. 7, July 2007
359
Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association has agreed to receive and publish manuscripts in accordance with the principles of the following committees:




