Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation: Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Open Technique

The aim was to compare intraoperative, postoperative and functional outcomes of patients undergoing living donor RAKT versus OKT. A retrospective analysis of all living donor's kidney transplantation performed in a tertiary center between 2013 and 2024 comparing RAKT with OKT was performed. All recipients in the OKT group were eligible for a RAKT. A total of 400 patients (200 RAKT and 200 OKT) were included. Recipients were younger in the RAKT cohort (48.0 versus 51.5 years, p = 0.045). Median operative time was significantly longer in the RAKT group (185.5 versus 120.0 min, p < 0.0001). Intraoperative complications rate was similar in both study group. A significantly higher proportion of recipients receiving OKT undergone post-operative surgical complications (p < 0.0001) and major post-operative complications (8.0% versus 19.5%, p = 0.001). Seven patients required graft nephrectomy during the early post-operative period (of whom all were in the RAKT group). Median length of hospitalization was significantly longer in the OKT group (7.0 versus 9.0 days, p < 0.0001). 1-, 3- and 5-years patient and graft survival were comparable between the RAKT and OKT cohorts. The postoperative opioid requirement was not evaluated. Our analysis confirms the safety and efficacy of RAKT in the setting of living donors, in comparison to conventional OKT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transplant International
Published
2025-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/ti.2025.14953
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Organ Donation and Transplantation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation: Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Open Technique

María J. Ribal, Carmen Martı́nez, Enric Carbonell, Fritz Diekman et al.
1 citations
Transplant International
Organ Donation and Transplantation
1.88
article

Living-Donor Kidney Transplantation: Comparison of Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Open Technique

María J. Ribal, Carmen Martı́nez, Enric Carbonell, Fritz Diekman, Antoni Vilaseca, Beatriz Tena, Thomas Prudhomme, Conchita Monsalve, Natalia Segura, María León, Tarek Ajami, Mireía Musquera, Lluís Peri, Antonio Alcaraz, Ignacio Revuelta, Byron López de Mesa Rodriguez, Maria Munni
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The aim was to compare intraoperative, postoperative and functional outcomes of patients undergoing living donor RAKT versus OKT. A retrospective analysis of all living donor's kidney transplantation performed in a tertiary center between 2013 and 2024 comparing RAKT with OKT was performed. All recipients in the OKT group were eligible for a RAKT. A total of 400 patients (200 RAKT and 200 OKT) were included. Recipients were younger in the RAKT cohort (48.0 versus 51.5 years, p = 0.045). Median operative time was significantly longer in the RAKT group (185.5 versus 120.0 min, p < 0.0001). Intraoperative complications rate was similar in both study group. A significantly higher proportion of recipients receiving OKT undergone post-operative surgical complications (p < 0.0001) and major post-operative complications (8.0% versus 19.5%, p = 0.001). Seven patients required graft nephrectomy during the early post-operative period (of whom all were in the RAKT group). Median length of hospitalization was significantly longer in the OKT group (7.0 versus 9.0 days, p < 0.0001). 1-, 3- and 5-years patient and graft survival were comparable between the RAKT and OKT cohorts. The postoperative opioid requirement was not evaluated. Our analysis confirms the safety and efficacy of RAKT in the setting of living donors, in comparison to conventional OKT.

Transplant InternationalVol. 38
Surgical Specialties (Canada) (CA), Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES), Surgical Specialties (United States) (US), Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Organ Donation and Transplantation
1.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.