Updated: Feb 6, 2007
In June 1990, a team that consisted of 2 urologists (Lou Kavoussi and Ralph Clayman), a general surgeon (Nat Soper), an anesthesiologist (Terri Monk), and an interventional radiologist (Mike Darcy) from Washington University performed the first laparoscopic nephrectomy. It was performed in an 85-year-old woman with a 3-cm right midrenal tumor. In December 1990, the team from Washington University proceeded to perform the world's first retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy and laparoscopic nephroureterectomy. In 1995, Lloyd Ratner and Lou Kavoussi, from Johns Hopkins University, performed the first laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN). This technique was later extended to include cyst excision, caliceal diverticulectomy, pyelolithotomy, and renal biopsy.
In the first clinical application of telesurgery, Marescaux and Gagner performed a transatlantic robotic cholecystectomy between France and New York using the ZEUS system. In 2001, Guillonneau performed the first robot-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy in a human using the ZEUS system for nonfunctioning hydronephrotic right kidney due to uteropelvic junction obstruction.
The two techniques for performing minimally invasive renal surgery are robotic (robot-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy) and laparoscopic (laparoscopic nephrectomy). Both of these procedures can be performed transperitoneally or extraperitoneally and can both be performed with hand-port placement.
Currently, the da Vinci robotic surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Mountain View, Calif) is the only telemanipulator approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for cardiac and general abdominal procedures in the United States. In the past, the ZEUS robotic surgical system (Computer Motion, Goleta, Calif) was used in addition to the da Vinci surgical system.
The da Vinci surgical system consists of 2 primary components: (1) the surgeon's 3-dimensional viewing and control console and (2) the surgical arm unit that holds and manipulates the detachable surgical instruments. One arm holds the endoscope; the other 2 or 3 arms hold various EndoWrist instruments, which are tiny, computer-enhanced mechanical wrists with 7 degrees of freedom that provide the dexterity of the surgeon's hand and wrist at the operative site through 8-mm ports.
Robotic transperitoneal approach
The transperitoneal approach as described by Hoznek is as follows (Hoznek, 2004):
Robotic transperitoneal approach with hand-port placement
Most commonly used for donor nephrectomy, this involves a lower midline incision for the hand port. Four trocars are placed. A 12-mm port for the camera is placed at the level of renal hilum; this is flanked by an 8-mm robotic port placed equidistantly in a V-shaped fashion. Another 12-mm assistant port is placed close to the midline at the pubic level. An assistant retracts the tissues and helps the surgeon at the console to proceed with the dissection. The dissection is performed similarly to the above description and involves medial mobilization of the colon followed by identification of the ureter; the renal hilum is then traced from the gonadal vein. The renal attachments are taken down; the renal hilum is then secured and transected. The specimen is retracted through the midline incision.
Laparoscopic nephrectomy
Positioning of patient and ports: This technique was developed by Flowers et al using a full decubitus position (Flowers, 1997). The patient is placed in the full lateral position (right side down for left nephrectomy), with arms separated with pillows and rested on the arm rest. The first port is placed on the lateral border of the rectus sheath; this is followed by the semi-elliptical placement of 3 other ports around the target organ. The ports are separated by at least 10 cm. A 30° camera is used. The camera port is positioned farthest cephalad, followed by the left and right working-port sites; the most caudal is the assistant port.
Dissection of the renal vein, artery, and superior pole: The dissection begins with the medial mobilization of the colon along the white line of Toldt, with the distal extent at the level of the iliac vessels and the proximal extent lateral to the spleen. The Gerota fascia is incised at the superior pole, creating a dissecting plane between the adrenal gland and the kidney. The adrenal vein is identified and secured. The renal vein and its branches are identified when the Gerota fascia is entered, usually directly caudad to the adrenal gland. Another approach would be to follow the gonadal vein to the renal hilum. The renal artery is usually located behind and slightly inferior to the renal vein.
Ureteral and inferior pole dissection: The ureter is identified with blunt dissection lateral to the gonadal vein. The ureter is dissected along with a good amount of periureteral tissue and fat up to the iliac vessels. The ureter is retracted superiorly and anteriorly, exposing the triangle of tissue between the renal vessels, ureter, and retroperitoneum. The kidney and the perinephric fat are dissected from the iliopsoas and lateral abdominal wall.
Division of renal hilum: The ureter is clipped and transected. The arterial supply is stapled prior to transection; this is followed by renal vein control. A midline incision is made, and the specimen is extracted.
Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy
In this technique, a hand port is inserted through an abdominal incision at the beginning of the procedure. Two other ports are placed—one for the camera and one for the working port. An additional assistant port is optional. The dissection is very similar to the above description.
The following are suggestions for surgeons who are interested in implementing the robotic and laparoscopic renal surgery into their practice:
The advantages of laparoscopy include decreased pain, hospital stay, convalescence time, wound infection risk, and pulmonary complications and improved cosmesis. However, despite well-established advantages of laparoscopy over conventional surgery, laparoscopy has a steep learning curve. Despite the advances in laparoscopy, this technique has the following inherent limitations:
The da Vinci system is equipped with 3-dimensional vision with magnification X10 and X15, 7° of freedom of movement, and an articulating robotic EndoWrist, which mimics the surgeon's hand movements. Robotic assistance significantly reduces the technical challenge and learning curve and extends the potential for an open surgeon to embrace these developments easily. The robotic articulating wrist allows precise dissection. Robot-assisted procedures are increasingly being used; however, the robot-assisted technology is expensive. The EndoWrist instruments can be used only 10 times, requiring constant replacement. This technique requires a dedicated operating department team with special training in handling robot equipment.
The superiority of laparoscopy over conventional surgery is well established. Presently, the trend is to evaluate the superiority of laparoscopic nephrectomy in transplant surgery. Table 1 summarizes the outcomes of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) compared with open nephrectomy in 5 large series, as outlined by Alston et al (2005).
Table 1. The Outcomes of LDN Compared With Those of Open Nephrectomy
| Investigator | Patients, No. | Left/Right | WIT* (min) | EBL (mL) | OR Time (min) | Open Conversion (%) | Hospital Stay (d) | Ureteral Complications (%) | DGF (%) | Recipient SCr§ level; (mg/dL) |
| Ratner et al (2001) | ||||||||||
| LDN | 70 | ... | ... | 266 ±174 | 230 ±29 | ... | 3 ±0.9 | ... | ... | ... |
| Open | 20 | ... | ... | 393 ±335 | 183 ±48 | ... | 5.7 ±1.7 | ... | ... | ... |
| Rawlins et al (2002) | ||||||||||
| LDN | 100 | 100/0 | 2.3 | 102 | 231 | 1 | 3.3 | 2 | ... | 1.47 (5 d) |
| Open | 50 | 37/13 | ... | 193 | 209 | ... | 4.7 | 6 | ... | 1.42 (5 d) |
| Simforoosh et al (2003) | ||||||||||
| LDN | 40 | 40/0 | 6.6 | ... | 251.4 | 2.5 | 2.21 | 0 | ... | 1.5 (30 d) |
| Open | 40 | 40/0 | 2.09 | ... | 135 | ... | 2.13 | ... | ... | 1.3 (30 d) |
| Jacobs et al (2004) | ||||||||||
| LDN | 738 | 709/29 | 2.81 | 128 ±194 | 202 ±52.4 | 1.6 | 2.6 | 4.4 | 2.6 | 2 (7 d); 1.6 (1 y) |
| El-Galley et al (2004) | ||||||||||
| LDN | 28 | 28/0 | 3 ±22 | 200 ±107 | 306 ±40 | 0 | 2 ±2 | ... | ... | ... |
| Open | 55 | ... | 2 ±1 | 320 ±199 | 163 ±24 | ... | 2 ±2 | ... | ... | ... |
*WIT indicates warm ischemia time.
EBL indicates estimated blood loss.
DGF indicates donor graft failure.
§SCr indicates serum creatinine.
The application of robot in clinical application is relatively new and lacks controlled randomized studies that compare the outcomes with those of laparoscopic nephrectomy. Kumar et al summarized a series of papers with the author's remarks regarding robotic nephrectomy (Kumar, 2005).
Table 2. Robot-Assisted Nephrectomy
| Reference | Subjects | Cases, No. | Type | Technical Success | Remarks |
| Gill, 2000 | Swine | 5 | Simple | All | Technical feasibility of telerobotics |
| Long operative time; learning curve | |||||
| Sung, 2001 | Swine | 11 | Simple | All | Comparison of ZEUS and da Vinci systems |
| Guillonneau, 2001 | Human | 1 | Simple | All | ZEUS and AESOP systems |
| Marella (2004) | Human | 18 | Simple | Unreported | Compared with hand-assisted laparoscopy |
| Hubert, 2003 | Human | 12 | Simple | 11/12 | Moderate laparoscopy experience |
| 2 | Radical | ||||
| 2 | Donor | ||||
| Pedraza, 2004 | Human | 1 | Nephroureterectomy | All | |
| Horgan, 2002 | Human | 12 | Donor | All | Longer vessels retrieved; shorter hospitalization |
Alston C, Spaliviero M, Gill IS. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Urology. May 2005;65(5):833-9.
El-Galley R, Hood N, Young CJ, et al. Donor nephrectomy: A comparison of techniques and results of open, hand assisted and full laparoscopic nephrectomy. J Urol. Jan 2004;171(1):40-3.
Flowers JL, Jacobs S, Cho E, et al. Comparison of open and laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. Ann Surg. Oct 1997;226(4):483-9; discussion 489-90. [Medline].
Gill IS, Sung GT, Hsu TH, Meraney AM. Robotic remote laparoscopic nephrectomy and adrenalectomy: the initial experience. J Urol. Dec 2000;164(6):2082-5. [Medline].
Guillonneau B, Jayet C, Tewari A, Vallancien G. Robot assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. J Urol. Jul 2001;166(1):200-1. [Medline].
Hemal AK, Menon M. Robotics in urology. Curr Opin Urol. Mar 2004;14(2):89-93.
Horgan S, Vanuno D, Benedetti E. Early experience with robotically assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. Feb 2002;12(1):64-70. [Medline].
Hoznek A, Hubert J, Antiphon P, et al. Robotic renal surgery. Urol Clin North Am. Nov 2004;31(4):731-6.
Hubert J, Feuillu F. Robotic (da Vinci) remote laparoscopic nephrectomy feasibility and results in 16 cases. Eur Urol. 2003;198.
Jacobs SC, Cho E, Foster C, et al. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: the University of Maryland 6-year experience. J Urol. Jan 2004;171(1):47-51. [Medline].
Kumar R, Hemal AK, Menon M. Robotic renal and adrenal surgery: present and future. BJU Int. Aug 2005;96(3):244-9.
Marella V, Wise G. Adjunctive technologies in laparoscopic nephrectomy-comparison of hand-assisted and robotic techniques. J Urol. 2004;171 (suppl):339.
Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, et al. Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature. Sep 27 2001;413(6854):379-80.
Pedraza R, Palmer L, Moss V, Franco I. Bilateral robotic assisted laparoscopic heminephroureterectomy. J Urol. Jun 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2394-5.
Ratner LE, Montgomery RA, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy. A review of the first 5 years. Urol Clin North Am. Nov 2001;28(4):709-19. [Medline].
Rawlins MC, Hefty TL, Brown SL, Biehl TR. Learning laparoscopic donor nephrectomy safely: a report on 100 cases. Arch Surg. May 2002;137(5):531-4; discussion 534-5. [Medline].
Simforoosh N, Bassiri A, Ziaee SA, et al. Laparoscopic versus open live donor nephrectomy: the first randomized clinical trial. Transplant Proc. Nov 2003;35(7):2553-4. [Medline].
Sung GT, Gill IS. Robotic renal and adrenal surgery. Surg Clin North Am. Dec 2003;83(6):1469-82. [Medline].
Sung GT, Gill IS. Robotic laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of the DA Vinci and Zeus systems. Urology. Dec 2001;58(6):893-8. [Medline].
Taylor GD, Cadeddu JA. Applications of laparoscopic surgery in urology: impact on patient care. Med Clin North Am. Mar 2004;88(2):519-38.
minimally invasive nephrectomy, laparoscopic nephrectomy, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, LDN, radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, simple nephrectomy, hand-assisted nephrectomy, hand-assisted donor nephrectomy, laparoscopic renal surgery, robotic nephrectomy, robot-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy, robotic renal surgery, retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephrectomy, laparoscopic nephroureterectomy, telesurgery, da Vinci robotic surgical system, telemanipulator, ZEUS robotic surgical system, telerobotics
Subhashini M Ayloo, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago
Subhashini M Ayloo, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Stewart B Lipson, MD, FACS, Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicag
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS, Associate Professor of Urology, Director, Center for Laparoscopy and Endourology, Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Bradley Fields Schwartz, DO, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association, Association of Military Osteopathic Physicians and Surgeons, Endourological Society, Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, and Society of University Urologists
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
Martin I Resnick, MD , Former Lester Persky Professor and Chair, Department of Urology, Former Professor, Department of Oncology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine
Martin I Resnick, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Federation for Medical Research, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, American Medical Association, American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, American Society of Andrology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Surgical Association, American Urological Association, Association for Academic Surgery, Endocrine Society, National Kidney Foundation, Ohio Urological Society, and Pan American Medical Association
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
J Stuart Wolf, Jr, MD, FACS, David A Bloom Professor of Urology, Director, Division of Minimally Invasive Urology, Department of Urology, University of Michigan Medical Center
J Stuart Wolf, Jr, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Medical Association, American Urological Association, Catholic Medical Association, Endourological Society, Society for Urology and Engineering, Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, and Society of University Urologists
Disclosure: Terumo Corporation Consulting fee Consulting; Omeros Corporation Consulting fee Consulting
Stephen W Leslie, MD, FACS, Founder and Medical Director of the Lorain Kidney Stone Research Center, Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Urology, Medical College of Ohio
Stephen W Leslie, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Surgeons, American Urological Association, National Kidney Foundation, and Ohio State Medical Association
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.
© 1994-
by Medscape.
All Rights Reserved
(http://www.medscape.com/public/copyright)