Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2025 Sep;136(3):484-492.
doi: 10.1111/bju.16799. Epub 2025 May 26.

Robot-assisted vs open kidney transplantation from deceased donors

Luca Afferi  1   2   3 , Angelo Territo  2 , Alessio Pecoraro  4   5 , Lorenzo Masieri  4   5 , Milla Ortved  6 , Julia Abildgaard Dagnæs-Hansen  6 , Begonya Etcheverry  7 , Andrea Gallioli  2 , Donato Cannoletta  1   8 , Joris Vangeneugden  9   10   11 , Jeremy Mercier  12 , Thomas Prudhomme  12 , Isacco Donnini  1 , Antonino Vazzana  1 , Malene Rohrsted  6 , Francesc Vigués  7 , Nicolas Doumerc  12 , Karel Decaestecker  9   10   11 , Joan Palou  1   2 , Riccardo Campi  4   5 , Sergio Serni  4   5 , Andreas Roder  6 , Alberto Breda  1   2
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Robot-assisted vs open kidney transplantation from deceased donors

Luca Afferi et al. BJU Int. 2025 Sep.

Abstract

Objectives: To test the hypothesis that the type of surgical approach, robot-assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) vs open kidney transplantation (OKT), impacts intra-operative and postoperative surgical outcomes of patients receiving kidney transplantation from deceased donors.

Materials and methods: This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study including 676 patients who received RAKT or OKT in the period 2015 to 2023 in one of seven European academic centres. Patient heterogeneity at baseline was balanced using 2:1 nearest neighbour propensity-score matching. Intra- and postoperative complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Kaplan-Meier estimates and the log-rank test were used to compare dialysis-free survival (DFS), graft survival (GS), reintervention-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) according to the surgical approach used.

Results: After propensity-score matching, two cohorts of 72 recipients (65%) in the OKT group and 37 (35%) in the RAKT group with similar baseline characteristics were obtained. The site of transplantation was the right iliac fossa in 59 (82%) and 28 patients (76%) undergoing OKT and RAKT, respectively. RAKT was associated with shorter rewarming time (53 vs 39 min), total vascular anastomosis time (55 vs 36 min), and arterial (25 vs 17 min) and venous (28 vs 18 min) anastomosis times (all P < 0.001), whereas OKT was associated with reduced surgical time (180 vs 200 min; P = 0.01). Intra-operative complications were more commonly reported in recipients undergoing OKT (8.3% vs 2.7%; P = 0.4). During follow-up, no differences in terms of postoperative complications, DFS, GS, RFS or OS were detected.

Conclusions: This is the largest comparative study of RAKT vs OKT in the deceased donor setting. While it confirms the safety of RAKT from deceased donors, it underscores the superiority of RAKT in selected patients in terms of achieving vascular anastomosis and rewarming time in a shorter timeframe.

Keywords: deceased donors; kidney transplantation; open kidney transplantation; renal transplantation; robot‐assisted kidney transplantation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Kaplan–Meier curves with 60 months landmark estimating (A) dialysis‐free survival, (B) graft survival, (C) reintervention‐free survival and (D) overall survival in 109 patients undergoing open kidney transplantation (OKT) or robot‐assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) from deceased donors.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) levels in 109 patients undergoing open kidney transplantation (OKT) or robot‐assisted kidney transplantation (RAKT) from deceased donors.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Breda A, Gausa L, Territo A et al. Robotic‐assisted kidney transplantation: our first case. World J Urol 2016; 34: 443–447 - PubMed
    1. Doumerc N, Roumiguié M, Rischmann P, Sallusto F. Totally robotic approach with transvaginal insertion for kidney transplantation. Eur Urol 2015; 68: 1103–1104 - PubMed
    1. Territo A, Afferi L, Musquera M et al. Robot‐assisted kidney transplantation: the 8‐year European experience. Eur Urol 2025; 87: 468–475 - PubMed
    1. Prudhomme T, Beauval JB, Lesourd M et al. Robotic‐assisted kidney transplantation in obese recipients compared to non‐obese recipients: the European experience. World J Urol 2021; 39: 1287–1298 - PubMed
    1. Siena G, Campi R, Decaestecker K 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 2018; 4: 175–184 - PubMed