Webster, A. C., Nagler, E. V., Morton, R. L. & Masson, P. Chronic kidney disease. Lancet 389, 1238–1252 (2017).
de Vries, E. F., Los, J., de Wit, G. A. & Hakkaart-van Roijen, L. Patient, family and productivity costs of end-stage renal disease in the Netherlands; exposing non-healthcare related costs. BMC Nephrol. 22, 1–9 (2021).
Wang, V., Vilme, H., Maciejewski, M. L. & Boulware, L. E. The economic burden of chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease. Semin. Nephrol. 36, 319–330 (2016).
Cabrera, V. J., Hansson, J., Kliger, A. S. & Finkelstein, F. O. Symptom management of the patient with CKD: the role of dialysis. Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 12, 687–693 (2017).
Hariharan, S., Israni, A. K. & Danovitch, G. Long-term survival after kidney transplantation. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, 729–743 (2021).
Merrill, J. P., Murray, J. E., Harrison, J. H. & Guild, W. R. Successful homotransplantation of the human kidney between identical twins. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 160, 277–282 (1956).
Lanfranco, A. R., Castellanos, A. E., Desai, J. P. & Meyers, W. C. Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann. Surg. 239, 14 (2004).
Zahid, A. et al. Robotic surgery in comparison to the open and laparoscopic approaches in the field of urology: a systematic review. J. Robot. Surg. 17, 11–29 (2023).
Marzi, V. L. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: is it getting ready for prime time? World J. Transpl. 12, 163–174 (2022).
Gallioli, A., Rivas, J. G., Larcher, A. & Breda, A. Living donor robot-assisted kidney transplantation: a new standard of care? Curr. Urol. Rep. 22, 58 (2021).
Pecoraro, A. et al. Urologists and kidney transplantation: the first European census. Eur. Urol. 82, 336–337 (2022).
Musquera, M. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: update from the European Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) series. BJU Int. 127, 222–228 (2021).
Breda, A. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: the European experience. Eur. Urol. 73, 273–281 (2018).
Breda, A. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation: one year after the beginning. World J. Urol. 35, 1507–1515 (2017).
Tzvetanov, I. G. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation in the obese patient: 10-year experience from a single center. Am. J. Transpl. 20, 430–440 (2020).
Rosales, A. et al. Laparoscopic kidney transplantation. Eur. Urol. 57, 164–167 (2010).
Modi, P. et al. Retroperitoneoscopic living-donor nephrectomy and laparoscopic kidney transplantation: experience of initial 72 cases. Transplantation 95, 100–105 (2013).
Benedetti, E. & Shapiro, R. Laparoscopic kidney transplantation-novel or novelty? Am. J. Transpl. 11, 1121–1122 (2011).
Menon, M. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia: evolution of a novel procedure utilizing the IDEAL guidelines (IDEAL phase 0 and 1). Eur. Urol. 65, 1001–1009 (2014).
Menon, M. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia: a step-by-step description of the Vattikuti Urology Institute-Medanta technique (IDEAL phase 2a). Eur. Urol. 65, 991–1000 (2014).
Ahlawat, R. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia versus open kidney transplantation for patients with end stage renal disease: an ideal stage 2b study. J. Urol. 205, 595–602 (2021).
Hoznek, A. et al. Robotic assisted kidney transplantation: an initial experience. J. Urol. 167, 1604–1606 (2002).
Giulianotti, P. et al. Robotic transabdominal kidney transplantation in a morbidly obese patient. Am. J. Transpl. 10, 1478–1482 (2010).
Oberholzer, J. et al. Minimally invasive robotic kidney transplantation for obese patients previously denied access to transplantation. Am. J. Transpl. 13, 721–728 (2013).
Pennell, C. P. et al. Practical guide to the Idea, Development and Exploration stages of the IDEAL Framework and Recommendations. Br. J. Surg. 103, 607–615 (2016).
Rodríguez Faba, O. et al. European Association of Urology guidelines on renal transplantation: update 2018. Eur. Urol. Focus 4, 208–215 (2018).
Merseburger, A. S. et al. EAU guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology. Eur. Urol. 64, 277–291 (2013).
Queiroz, V. N. F. et al. Ventilation and outcomes following robotic-assisted abdominal surgery: an international, multicentre observational study. Br. J. Anaesth. 126, 533–543 (2021).
Hazebroek, E. J. et al. Long-term impact of pneumoperitoneum used for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy on renal function and histomorphology in donor and recipient rats. Ann. Surg. 237, 351–357 (2003).
Piana, A. et al. Three-dimensional augmented reality-guided robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: breaking the limit of atheromatic plaques. Eur. Urol. 82, 419–426 (2022).
Campi, R. et al. Robotic versus open kidney transplantation from deceased donors: a prospective observational study. Eur. Urol. Open. Sci. 39, 36–46 (2022).
Peris, A. et al. Implementing a donation after circulatory death program in a setting of donation after brain death activity. Minerva Anestesiol. 84, 1387–1392 (2018).
The European Association of Urology. European Textbook on Kidney Transplantation https://www.researchgate.net/profile/SohrabArora/publication/332706188_Robotic_Kidney_Transplantation/links/5cc4fbee92851c8d220992a0/Robotic-Kidney-Transplantation.pdf (EAU, 2017).
Siena, G. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia using grafts with multiple vessels after extracorporeal vascular reconstruction: results from the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section Working Group. Eur. Urol. Focus. 4, 175–184 (2018).
Vignolini, G. et al. The University of Florence technique for robot-assisted kidney transplantation: 3-year experience. Front. Surg. 7, 583798 (2020).
Spinoit, A. F. et al. Single-setting robot-assisted kidney transplantation consecutive to single-port laparoscopic nephrectomy in a child and robot-assisted living-related donor nephrectomy: initial Ghent experience. J. Pediatr. Urol. 15, 578–579 (2019).
Doumerc, N., Roumiguié, M., Rischmann, P. & Sallusto, F. Totally robotic approach with transvaginal insertion for kidney transplantation. Eur. Urol. 68, 1103–1104 (2015).
Vignolini, G. et al. Intraoperative assessment of ureteral and graft reperfusion during robotic kidney transplantation with indocyanine green fluorescence videography. Minerva Urol. Nefrol. 71, 79–84 (2019).
Basile, G. et al. Comparison between near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green and infrared imaging: on-bench trial for kidney perfusion analysis. A project of the ESUT-YAUWP group. Minerva Urol. Nefrol. 71, 280–285 (2019).
Veneziano, D. et al. Preliminary evaluation of infrared imaging for real-time graft reperfusion assessment during kidney transplant: an ESUT-YAUWP project. Minerva Urol. Nephrol. 75, 126–129 (2023).
Alberts, V. P., Idu, M. M., Legemate, D. A., Laguna Pes, M. P. & Minnee, R. C. Ureterovesical anastomotic techniques for kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Transpl. Int. 27, 593–605 (2014).
Campi, R. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation allows safe access for transplant renal biopsy and percutaneous procedures. Transpl. Int. 32, 1333–1335 (2019).
Boggi, U. et al. Robotic renal transplantation: first European case. Transpl. Int. 24, 213–218 (2011).
Breda, A. et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: our first case. World J. Urol. 34, 443–447 (2016).
Territo, A. et al. European experience of robot-assisted kidney transplantation: minimum of 1-year follow-up. BJU Int. 122, 255–262 (2018).
Ganpule, A. et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplant: a single center experience with median follow-up of 2.8 years. World J. Urol. 38, 2651–2660 (2020).
Patil, A. et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional open kidney transplantation: a propensity matched comparison with median follow-up of 5 years. Am. J. Clin. Exp. Urol. 11, 168 (2023).
Garcia-Roca, R. et al. Single center experience with robotic kidney transplantation for recipients with BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater: a comparison with the UNOS registry. Transplantation 101, 191–196 (2017).
Kishore, T. A. et al. Robotic assisted kidney transplantation in grafts with multiple vessels: single center experience. Int. Urol. Nephrol. 52, 247–252 (2020).
Ekşi, M. et al. Can robot-assisted kidney transplantation provide higher quality of life than open kidney transplantation during the early postoperative period? Int. J. Clin. Pract. 75, e14288 (2021).
Karadag, S. et al. Comparison of open and robot-assisted kidney transplantation in terms of perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2022, 2663108 (2022).
Tinney, F. et al. Robotic-assisted versus open technique for living donor kidney transplantation: a comparison using propensity score matching for intention to treat. Transpl. Direct 8, E1320 (2022).
Territo, A. et al. Prospective comparative study of postoperative systemic inflammatory syndrome in robot-assisted vs. open kidney transplantation. World J. Urol. 40, 2153–2159 (2022).
Maheshwari, R. et al. Prospective nonrandomized comparison between open and robot-assisted kidney transplantation: analysis of midterm functional outcomes. J. Endourol. 34, 939–945 (2020).
Pein, U. et al. Minimally invasive robotic versus conventional open living donor kidney transplantation. World J. Urol. 38, 795–802 (2020).
Tuğcu, V. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: comparison of the first 40 cases of open vs robot-assisted transplantations by a single surgeon. BJU Int. 121, 275–280 (2018).
Liu, G., Deng, Y., Zhang, S., Lin, T. & Guo, H. Robot-assisted versus conventional open kidney transplantation: a meta-analysis. Biomed. Res. Int. 2020, 2358028 (2020).
Madhavan, K., Jena, R., Bhargava, P., Pradhan, A. & Bhandari, M. Comparison of outcomes after open versus robotic kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian. J. Urol. 39, 186 (2023).
Checcucci, E. et al. The metaverse in urology: ready for prime time. The ESUT, ERUS, EULIS, and ESU perspective. Eur. Urol. Open. Sci. 46, 96–98 (2022).
Dell’Oglio, P. et al. Definition of a structured training curriculum for robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal ileal conduit in male patients: a Delphi consensus study led by the ERUS educational board. Eur. Urol. Focus. 8, 160–164 (2022).
Larcher, A. et al. The ERUS curriculum for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: structure definition and pilot clinical validation. Eur. Urol. 75, 1023–1031 (2019).
Campi, R. et al. The first entirely 3D-printed training model for robot-assisted kidney transplantation: the RAKT box. Eur. Urol. Open. Sci. 53, 98–105 (2023).
Pecoraro, A. et al. The learning curve for open and minimally-invasive kidney transplantation: a systematic review. Minerva Urol. Nephrol. 74, 669–679 (2022).
Sood, A. et al. Application of the statistical process control method for prospective patient safety monitoring during the learning phase: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia (IDEAL phase 2a-b). Eur. Urol. 66, 371–378 (2014).
Bansal, D., Chaturvedi, S., Maheshwari, R., Bansal, A. & Kumar, A. Establishing a robot-assisted kidney transplant program: independent evaluation of the learning curve and surgical nuances. J. Endourol. 35, 1650–1658 (2021).
Gallioli, A. et al. Learning curve in robot-assisted kidney transplantation: results from the European Robotic Urological Society Working Group. Eur. Urol. 78, 239–247 (2020).
Ahlawat, R. K. et al. Learning curves and timing of surgical trials: robotic kidney transplantation with regional hypothermia. J. Endourol. 32, 1160–1165 (2018).
Collins, J. W. et al. Utilising the Delphi process to develop a proficiency-based progression train-the-trainer course for robotic surgery training. Eur. Urol. 75, 775–785 (2019).
Mazzone, E. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of proficiency-based progression simulation training on performance outcomes. Ann. Surg. 274, 281–289 (2021).
Tiong, H. Y., Goh, B. Y. S., Chiong, E., Tan, L. G. L. & Vathsala, A. Robotic kidney autotransplantation in a porcine model: a procedure-specific training platform for the simulation of robotic intracorporeal vascular anastomosis. J. Robot. Surg. 12, 693–698 (2018).
Denizet, G., Calame, P., Lihoreau, T., Kleinclauss, F. & Aubry, S. 3D multi-tissue printing for kidney transplantation. Quant. Imaging Med. Surg. 9, 101–106 (2019).
Saba, P. et al. Development of a high-fidelity robot-assisted kidney transplant simulation platform using three-dimensional printing and hydrogel casting technologies. J. Endourol. 34, 1088–1094 (2020).
Grammens, J. et al. Pediatric challenges in robot-assisted kidney transplantation. Front. Surg. 8, 649418 (2021).
Bansal, A., Maheshwari, R., Chaturvedi, S., Bansal, D. & Kumar, A. Comparative analysis of outcomes and long-term follow-up of robot-assisted pediatric kidney transplantation, with open counterpart. Pediatr. Transpl. 25, (2021).
Casale, P. Laparoscopic and robotic approach to genitourinary anomalies in children. Urol. Clin. North. Am. 37, 279–286 (2010).
Segev, D. L. et al. Obesity impacts access to kidney transplantation. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 19, 349–355 (2008).
Lynch, R. J. et al. Obesity, surgical site infection, and outcome following renal transplantation. Ann. Surg. 250, 1014–1020 (2009).
Spaggiari, M. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation from deceased donors: a single-center experience. Am. J. Transpl. 23, 642–648 (2023).
Huang, E. & Bunnapradist, S. Pre-transplant weight loss and survival after kidney transplantation. Am. J. Nephrol. 41, 448–455 (2015).
Prudhomme, T. et al. Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation in obese recipients compared to non-obese recipients: the European experience. World J. Urol. 39, 1287–1298 (2021).
Orandi, B. J. et al. Obesity as an isolated contraindication to kidney transplantation in the end-stage renal disease population: a cohort study. Obesity 29, 1538–1546 (2021).
Spaggiari, M. et al. Minimally invasive, robot-assisted procedure for kidney transplantation among morbidly obese: positive outcomes at 5 years post-transplant. Clin. Transplant. 32, e13404 (2018).
Lee, S. D. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation is a safe alternative approach for morbidly obese patients with end-stage renal disease. Int. J. Med. Robot. 17, e2293 (2021).
Spaggiari, M. et al. Simultaneous robotic kidney transplantation and bariatric surgery for morbidly obese patients with end-stage renal failure. Am. J. Transpl. 21, 1525–1534 (2021).
Vignolini, G. et al. Development of a robot-assisted kidney transplantation programme from deceased donors in a referral academic centre: technical nuances and preliminary results. BJU Int. 123, 474–484 (2019).
Vignolini, G. et al. Robotic kidney transplantation from a brain-dead deceased donor in a patient with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: first case report. J. Endourol. Case Rep. 4, 124–128 (2018).
Klatte, T. et al. A Literature review of renal surgical anatomy and surgical strategies for partial nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. 68, 980–992 (2015).
Partin, A. W., Peters, C. A., Kavoussi, L. R., Dmochowski, R. R. & Wein, A. J. Campbell-Walsh-Wein Urology, Twelfth Ed. 4096 (2021).
Nataraj, S. A., Zafar, F. A., Ghosh, P. & Ahlawat, R. Feasibility and functional outcome of robotic assisted kidney transplantation using grafts with multiple vessels: comparison to propensity matched contemporary open kidney transplants cohort. Front. Surg. 7, 51 (2020).
Wotkowicz, C. & Libertino, J. A. Renal autotransplantation. BJU Int. 93, 253–257 (2004).
Gordon, Z. N., Angell, J. & Abaza, R. Completely intracorporeal robotic renal autotransplantation. J. Urol. 192, 1516–1522 (2014).
Alameddine, M. et al. Kidney autotransplantation: between the past and the future. Curr. Urol. Rep. 19, 7 (2018).
Hardy, J. D. High ureteral injuries. Management by autotransplantation of the kidney. JAMA 184, 97–101 (1963).
Lee, J. Y., Alzahrani, T. & Ordon, M. Intra-corporeal robotic renal auto-transplantation. Can. Urol. Assoc. J. 9, E748–E749 (2015).
Sood, A. et al. Minimally invasive kidney transplantation: perioperative considerations and key 6-month outcomes. Transplantation 99, 316–323 (2015).
Araki, M. et al. Robotic renal autotransplantation: first case outside of North America. Acta Med. Okayama 71, 351–355 (2017).
Decaestecker, K. et al. Robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation: a minimally invasive way to salvage kidneys. Eur. Urol. Focus. 4, 198–205 (2018).
Breda, A. et al. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal robot-assisted kidney autotransplantation: experience of the ERUS RAKT working group. Eur. Urol. 81, 168–175 (2022).
Vigués, F. et al. Orthotopic robot-assisted kidney transplantation: first case report. World J. Urol. 39, 2811–2813 (2021).
Serni, S. et al. Robot-assisted laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy: the University of Florence technique. Front. Surg. 7, 588215 (2021).
Territo, A. et al. Step-by-step development of a cold ischemia device for open and robotic-assisted renal transplantation. Eur. Urol. 80, 738–745 (2021).
Garisto, J. et al. Single port robot-assisted transperitoneal kidney transplant using the SP® surgical system in a pre-clinical model. Int. Braz. J. Urol. 46, 680–681 (2020).
Eltemamy, M., Garisto, J., Miller, E., Wee, A. & Kaouk, J. Single port robotic extra-peritoneal dual kidney transplantation: initial preclinical experience and description of the technique. Urology 134, 232–236 (2019).
Kaouk, J. et al. Initial experience with single-port robotic-assisted kidney transplantation and autotransplantation. Eur. Urol. 80, 366–373 (2021).
Kaouk, J. et al. Single port robotic kidney autotransplantation: initial case series and description of technique. Urology 176, 87–93 (2023).
Meier, R. P. H. et al. Intra-abdominal cooling system limits ischemia-reperfusion injury during robot-assisted renal transplantation. Am. J. Transpl. 18, 53–62 (2018).
Fan, Y. et al. Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: initial experience with a modified hypothermia technique. Urol. Int. 106, 504–511 (2022).
Checcucci, E. et al. 3D imaging applications for robotic urologic surgery: an ESUT YAUWP review. World J. Urol. 38, 869–881 (2020).
Checcucci, E. et al. Metaverse surgical planning with three-dimensional virtual models for minimally invasive partial nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EURURO.2023.07.015 (2023).
Porpiglia, F. et al. Current use of three-dimensional model technology in urology: a road map for personalised surgical planning. Eur. Urol. Focus. 4, 652–656 (2018).
Song, C., Cheng, L., Li, Y., Kreaden, U. & Snyder, S. R. Systematic literature review of cost-effectiveness analyses of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer. BMJ Open 12, e058394 (2022).
Labban, M. et al. Cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer in the UK. JAMA Netw. Open. 5, e225740–e225740 (2022).
- The Renal Warrior Project. Join Now
- Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41585-024-00865-z