Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

  1. Nick Townell (nick.townell@tuht.scot.nhs.uk), consultant urologist and honorary senior lecturer
  1. Department of Urology, Ninewells Hospital, University of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee DD1 9SY

    Is better after laparoscopy than the mini incision technique

    Ever since the first successful renal transplant involving live identical twins in 1954, increasing emphasis has been placed on minimising morbidity and mortality in the living donor.

    For many conditions, traditional open surgery has been replaced by a variety of minimal access techniques, mainly laparoscopy. These have important benefits for patients in terms of less intraoperative loss of blood, lower postoperative morbidity, and quicker recovery and return to normality.14

    For living donors of renal transplants it is important to determine which minimal access technique is best in terms of quality of life. In this issue of the BMJ Kok and colleagues report a randomised controlled trial that compares the effect of laparoscopic and mini incision open donor nephrectomy on quality of life in living donors after renal transplant surgery.5 The authors found that patients who had laparoscopy had better scores for physical fatigue (MFI-20) and physical function (SF-36) at one year than those who had the mini incision technique. They conclude that in centres with a highly experienced laparoscopic surgeon the laparoscopic technique is superior.5 …

    Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment

    Article access

    Article access for 1 day

    Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*

    The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record

    * Prices do not include VAT

    THIS WEEK'S POLL