Introduction of laparoscopic nephrectomy for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease as the standard procedure

Purpose Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is a common hereditary disorder and accounts for 5–10% of all cases of kidney failure. 50% of ADPKD patients reach kidney failure by the age of 58 years requiring dialysis or transplantation. Nephrectomy is performed in up to 20% of patients due to compressive symptoms, renal-related complications or in preparation for kidney transplantation. However, due to the large kidney size in ADPKD, nephrectomy can come with a considerable burden. Here we evaluate our institution’s experience of laparoscopic nephrectomy (LN) as an alternative to open nephrectomy (ON) for ADPKD patients. Materials and methods We report the results of the first 12 consecutive LN for ADPKD from August 2020 to August 2021 in our institution. These results were compared with the 12 most recent performed ON for ADPKD at the same institution (09/2017 to 07/2020). Intra- and postoperative parameters were collected and analyzed. Health related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using the SF36 questionnaire. Results Age, sex, and median preoperative kidney volumes were not significantly different between the two analyzed groups. Intraoperative estimated blood loss was significantly less in the laparoscopic group (33 ml (0–200 ml)) in comparison to the open group (186 ml (0–800 ml)) and postoperative need for blood transfusion was significantly reduced in the laparoscopic group ( p = 0.0462). Operative time was significantly longer if LN was performed (158 min (85–227 min)) compared to the open procedure (107 min (56–174 min)) ( p = 0.0079). In both groups one postoperative complication Clavien Dindo ≥ 3 occurred with the need of revision surgery. SF36 HRQol questionnaire revealed excellent postoperative quality of life after LN. Conclusion LN in ADPKD patients is a safe and effective operative procedure independent of kidney size with excellent postoperative outcomes and benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Compared with the open procedure patients profit from significantly less need for transfusion with comparable postoperative complication rates. However significant longer operation times need to be taken in account.