Robotic-assisted Donor Nephrectomy: As Safe as Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVES Robotic-assisted donor nephrectomy has become increasingly popular in recent years. We sought to compare robotic-assisted outcomes to operative outcomes in a historical cohort of laparoscopic donor nephrectomies. MATERIALS AND METHODS A retrospective review of 58 consecutive donor nephrectomies at a single center by two surgeons from 2015 to 2019 was performed. RESULTS Robotic-assisted (n = 32) and laparoscopic (n =26) donors were comparable in terms of estimated blood loss (66.4 vs. 62.5 mL; p=0.81) and length of stay (1.6 vs. 1.5 days; p=0.37). The post-operative change in creatinine was not significantly different between the groups (-0.45 vs. -0.45; p=0.97). Warm ischemia time was longer in the robotic group (7.36 vs. 5.15 minutes; p < 0.01). Case duration was significantly longer for robotic-assisted cases (306 vs. 247 minutes; p < 0.01). However, robotic cases were more likely to be right-sided (6/32 (18.8%) vs. 1/26 (3.8%)) and have vascular multiplicity (7/32 (21.9%) vs. 0/26 (0%)). There was one Clavien II or greater complication in the robotic group, and none in the laparoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS Our data agree with previous reports that robotic-assisted donor nephrectomy is safe and has similar outcomes to a laparoscopic approach. Moreover, cases with multiple renal arteries or veins and right-sided cases were completed safely using the robotic approach. The longer case duration in the robotic group was attributed to the learning curve associated with implementing a new technique, and later robotic operative times approached laparoscopic operative times.