Comparative study of laparoscopic and mini-incision open donor nephrectomy: have we heard the last word in the debate?

Objective: Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is generally considered a better option than open donor nephrectomy (ODN) as it is associated with better cosmesis, less post-operative pain and faster recovery. Mini-incision donor nephrectomy (MDN) has proven to be an effective and less invasive modification of classic ODN. Our aim was to compare the peri-operative outcomes and quality of life of donors following laparoscopic and mini-incision ODN.

Methods: One hundred patients, underwent donor nephrectomy using laparoscopic approach (n = 50) or open mini-incision approach (n = 50) over a period of 18 months. Data were entered into a prospective database and analyzed retrospectively.

Results: The mean operative (skin to skin) time for MDN, 53.9 min (range, 40-75 min), was significantly shorter than the 93.7 min (range, 75-140 min) for LDN. The laparoscopic donors had a longer hospital stay, warm ischemia time and higher operative and post-operative cost. There was no significant difference in the pain scores, graft function, or quality of life between the two groups.

Conclusions: MDN compares well with the laparoscopic approach in terms of post-operative pain, graft function and quality of life of donors. Significantly less operative time along with the reduced cost makes it a better option in our predominantly lower BMI patient population.