Laparoscopy-assisted and open living donor right hepatectomy: A comparative study of outcomes

Talia B. Baker*, Colleen L. Jay, Daniela P. Ladner, Luke B. Preczewski, Lori Clark, Jane Holl, Michael M. Abecassis

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

97 Scopus citations


Background: Minimally invasive liver surgery is a rapidly advancing field with demonstrated applicability to living donation. In this paper, we compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted donor right hepatectomy (LADRH) to open donor right hepatectomy (ODRH). Methods: We performed a retrospective, comparative analysis of 33 LADRH to the most recent 33 ODRH performed at our institution, evaluating donor complications, costs, and recipient outcomes. Results: Donor demographics including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and vascular and biliary anomalies were comparable. Donor complication rates were equivalent for LADRH and ODRH. Donor operative times were shorter for LADRH (LADRH 265 minutes, ODRH 316; P < .001) even after adjusting for BMI. Blood loss and length of stay were comparable. Additionally, total hospitalization costs were equivalent (LADRH $1.11, ODRH $1.00; P = .19). Higher operative supply costs for LADRH were balanced by higher time-based operative costs for ODRH resulting in no significant differences in total operative costs. Finally, there were no differences in graft size, recipient patient or graft survival, or recipient vascular or biliary complications. Conclusion: Our experience suggests that LADRH compares favorably with ODRH with equivalent safety, resource utilization, and effectiveness. We believe that LADRH provides potential physical and psychological benefits without an adverse effect on outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)817-825
Number of pages9
Issue number4
StatePublished - Oct 2009

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'Laparoscopy-assisted and open living donor right hepatectomy: A comparative study of outcomes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this