Cochrane · systematic review · CD006124
Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy for live kidney donors
Kourounis, G, Tingle, SJ, Hoather, TJ, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2024 · Cochrane Library
Kidney and TransplantAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
28
current version
GRADE rated
23
No studies
5
Included studies
NR
No studies 5 · 17.9%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 5 · 17.9%Low 10 · 35.7%Moderate 5 · 17.9%High 3 · 10.7%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Summary of findings table ‐ Open compared to laparoscopic in live donor nephrectomy (primary outcomes)
Population: live donor nephrectomy (primary outcomes)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Analgesia requirements Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 556 participants | High |
Duration of procedure Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | no estimate extracted | 7 studies · 815 participants | Moderate |
Blood loss Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 775 participants | Moderate Downgraded: indirectness |
Perioperative complications: pre 2010 Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 0.66 [0.39, 1.11] | 4 studies · 464 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Perioperative complications: post 2010 Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 2.19 [1.53, 3.13] | 2 studies · 303 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Perioperative complications: total Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 1.02 [0.55, 1.89] | 6 studies · 767 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Reoperations Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 0.57 [0.09, 3.64] | 6 studies · 596 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Warm ischaemia time Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | no estimate extracted | 7 studies · 815 participants | Moderate |
Hospital stay Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 775 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic compared to hand‐assisted in live donor nephrectomy (primary outcomes)
Population: live donor nephrectomy (primary outcomes)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Analgesia requirements Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 270 participants | High |
Duration of procedure Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 270 participants | Moderate |
Blood loss Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 270 participants | Low Downgraded: indirectness |
Perioperative Complications Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | RR 1.32 [0.79, 2.22] | 3 studies · 270 participants | Low |
Reoperations Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | RR 1.61 [0.2, 12.81] | 3 studies · 270 participants | Low |
Warm ischaemia time Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 270 participants | Very low Downgraded: indirectness |
Hospital stay Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 270 participants | High |
Summary of findings table ‐ Open compared to laparoscopic in live donor nephrectomy (secondary outcomes)
Population: live donor nephrectomy (secondary outcomes)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Early graft loss Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 0.36 [0.08, 1.74] | 4 studies · 356 participants | Low |
Delayed graft function Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 1.01 [0.51, 2.02] | 6 studies · 715 participants | Low |
Acute rejection Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 1.36 [0.86, 2.15] | 6 studies · 693 participants | Low |
Ureteric complications Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 1.58 [0.74, 3.36] | 6 studies · 775 participants | Low |
Kidney function at one year Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 538 participants | Low |
One year graft loss Summary of findings table ‐ Open vs laparoscopic | RR 0.86 [0.25, 2.96] | 3 studies · 403 participants | Low |
Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic compared to hand‐assisted in live donor nephrectomy (secondary outcomes)
Population: live donor nephrectomy (secondary outcomes)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Early graft loss ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Delayed graft function ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Acute rejection ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Ureteric complications ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Kidney function at one year ‐ not reported Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
One‐year graft loss Summary of findings table ‐ Laparoscopic vs hand‐assisted | RR 1.31 [0.51, 3.37] | 2 studies · 230 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |