Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy
Introduction. Systemic heparinisation is advocated during laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LDN) as a preventative measure against renal vascular thrombosis during the warm ischaemic interval. This study compares the outcome with and without the administration of systemic heparinisation. Methods....
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2013-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Transplantation |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/138926 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832565739532320768 |
|---|---|
| author | Charlotte Crotty Yasmin Tabbakh Sarah A. Hosgood Michael L. Nicholson |
| author_facet | Charlotte Crotty Yasmin Tabbakh Sarah A. Hosgood Michael L. Nicholson |
| author_sort | Charlotte Crotty |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction. Systemic heparinisation is advocated during laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LDN) as a preventative measure against renal vascular thrombosis during the warm ischaemic interval. This study compares the outcome with and without the administration of systemic heparinisation. Methods. A retrospective analysis was performed on 186 consecutive LDN patients between April 2008 and November 2012. Systemic heparin (2000–3000 IU) was administered intravenously to donors (hep n=109). From January 2010, heparin was not used systemically in this group of LDN (no hep n=77). Outcome measures included donor and recipient complications, initial graft function, and 12 month graft survival. Results. The demographics of both heparinised and non-heparinised donors were similar. The warm ischaemic time (WIT) was comparable in both groups (WIT; hep 5±3 versus no hep 5±3 minutes; P=1.000). There was no difference in complication rates, no episodes of graft thrombosis, and no incidences of primary nonfunction in either group. Delayed graft function occurred in 4/109 and 1/77 (3.6% versus 1.2%; P=0.405) and there was no significant difference in graft survival (P=0.650). Conclusion. Omitting systemic heparinisation during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is a feasible and safe approach that does not compromise donor or recipient outcome. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-b4d484b3daa44fe4aff68ff6c8bf6c26 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2090-0007 2090-0015 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2013-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Transplantation |
| spelling | doaj-art-b4d484b3daa44fe4aff68ff6c8bf6c262025-02-03T01:06:56ZengWileyJournal of Transplantation2090-00072090-00152013-01-01201310.1155/2013/138926138926Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor NephrectomyCharlotte Crotty0Yasmin Tabbakh1Sarah A. Hosgood2Michael L. Nicholson3Transplant Group, Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, Leicester General Hospital, University of Leicester, Leicester LE5 4PW, UKTransplant Group, Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, Leicester General Hospital, University of Leicester, Leicester LE5 4PW, UKTransplant Group, Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, Leicester General Hospital, University of Leicester, Leicester LE5 4PW, UKTransplant Group, Department of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, Leicester General Hospital, University of Leicester, Leicester LE5 4PW, UKIntroduction. Systemic heparinisation is advocated during laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LDN) as a preventative measure against renal vascular thrombosis during the warm ischaemic interval. This study compares the outcome with and without the administration of systemic heparinisation. Methods. A retrospective analysis was performed on 186 consecutive LDN patients between April 2008 and November 2012. Systemic heparin (2000–3000 IU) was administered intravenously to donors (hep n=109). From January 2010, heparin was not used systemically in this group of LDN (no hep n=77). Outcome measures included donor and recipient complications, initial graft function, and 12 month graft survival. Results. The demographics of both heparinised and non-heparinised donors were similar. The warm ischaemic time (WIT) was comparable in both groups (WIT; hep 5±3 versus no hep 5±3 minutes; P=1.000). There was no difference in complication rates, no episodes of graft thrombosis, and no incidences of primary nonfunction in either group. Delayed graft function occurred in 4/109 and 1/77 (3.6% versus 1.2%; P=0.405) and there was no significant difference in graft survival (P=0.650). Conclusion. Omitting systemic heparinisation during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is a feasible and safe approach that does not compromise donor or recipient outcome.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/138926 |
| spellingShingle | Charlotte Crotty Yasmin Tabbakh Sarah A. Hosgood Michael L. Nicholson Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy Journal of Transplantation |
| title | Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy |
| title_full | Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy |
| title_fullStr | Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy |
| title_short | Systemic Heparinisation in Laparoscopic Live Donor Nephrectomy |
| title_sort | systemic heparinisation in laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/138926 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT charlottecrotty systemicheparinisationinlaparoscopiclivedonornephrectomy AT yasmintabbakh systemicheparinisationinlaparoscopiclivedonornephrectomy AT sarahahosgood systemicheparinisationinlaparoscopiclivedonornephrectomy AT michaellnicholson systemicheparinisationinlaparoscopiclivedonornephrectomy |