INTRODUCTION:This study aimed to review the necessity of conventional interventions in renal transplant for preventing complications, namely the use of wound drains, ureteral stents and stapled skin closures.METHODS:We reviewed a series of 33 patients who received stentless, tubeless/drainless and suture-apposed living donor renal transplants (STAR group) and compared results to a control non-STAR group of 36 patients for which all three interventions of drains, stents and skin staples were used.RESULTS:There were no significant differences in demographics and clinical characteristics between the two groups. On assessing the overall surgical complications, there were no significant differences, including for wound infection, seroma, perinephric collections, urinoma, bactaeriuria or vascular complications. When analysed according to the interventions specific for preventing complications, although there were slightly more asymptomatic perinephric collections and two lymphoceles requiring treatment in the STAR group, these differences were not statistically significant. There was similarly no significant difference in ureteric or skin complications. Both groups had comparable good outcomes for renal function, graft survival and patient survival.CONCLUSION:The routine use of ureteric stents, drains or skin staples may not be necessary for uncomplicated renal transplants. Potential complications associated with the placement of these interventions can be avoided without compromising on the safety of patients and/or the outcome of transplants.
展开▼
