Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

in-biosketch:true

person:montgr01

Total Results:

532


Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: Refined surgical technique: 1997 [Meeting Abstract]

Montgomery, RA; Cadeddu, JA; Ratner, LE; Kavoussi, LR
ISI:000073081500506
ISSN: 0022-5347
CID: 1982122

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: Long term results [Meeting Abstract]

Ratner, LE; Bishoff, JT; Montgomery, RA; Kavoussi, LR
ISI:000073081500727
ISSN: 0022-5347
CID: 1983162

Living-donor nephrectomies: laparoscopy and open techniques [Letter]

Ratner, L E; Montgomery, R A; Kavoussi, L R
PMID: 9820359
ISSN: 0004-0010
CID: 493572

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: technical considerations and allograft vascular length [Letter]

Ratner, L E; Kavoussi, L R; Chavin, K D; Montgomery, R
PMID: 9665087
ISSN: 0041-1337
CID: 493632

Mesenteric vascular insufficiency

Montgomery, R A; Venbrux, A C; Bulkley, G B
PMID: 9427869
ISSN: 0011-3840
CID: 1982092

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy removes disincentives to live donation

Ratner, L E; Hiller, J; Sroka, M; Weber, R; Sikorsky, I; Montgomery, R A; Kavoussi, L R
PMID: 9414765
ISSN: 0041-1345
CID: 493762

Comparison of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy versus the standard open approach

Ratner, L E; Kavoussi, L R; Schulam, P G; Bender, J S; Magnuson, T H; Montgomery, R
PMID: 9122930
ISSN: 0041-1345
CID: 493902

Laparoscopic assisted live donor nephrectomy--a comparison with the open approach

Ratner, L E; Kavoussi, L R; Sroka, M; Hiller, J; Weber, R; Schulam, P G; Montgomery, R
Live donor renal transplantation provides significant advantages when compared with cadaveric donor renal transplantation in terms of improved patient and graft survival, a lower incidence of delayed function, and a shorter waiting time. Yet despite these advantages, live donors continue to be an under utilized source of kidneys for transplantation. Disincentives to live donation include the length of hospitalization, postoperative pain, cosmetic concerns, and the prolonged convalescence associated with the donor operation. In many instances minimally invasive video-assisted techniques have proven more efficacious than standard open procedures in terms of patient discomfort, length of hospital stay, cost, and length of time until the patient can return to full activity. Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomies are being performed at our institution in an attempt to make live donation more attractive to the potential donor. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review the results of laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy (LapNx) and to compare them with those obtained using the standard open approach (OpenNx). Ten consecutive LapNx were performed from February 1995 through April 1996. The control group consisted of the 20 consecutive OpenNx performed at the same institution from January 1991 through January 1995 immediately before the initiation of the LapNx program. Live donors were considered candidates for LapNx if they possessed at least one kidney with normal renal anatomy with single renal vessels and a single ureter. LapNx was safely performed in all cases. No patients required open conversion or blood transfusions. The allograft warm ischemic time for the laparoscopic cases was 4.2+/-1.3 min. All kidneys harvested laparoscopically produced urine on the table immediately upon revascularization. Presently nine of the ten recipients have functioning allografts. At three months posttransplant the calculated recipient creatinine clearances were 67.0+/-11.5 ml/min and 64.8+/-21.4 ml/min for the LapNx and OpenNx groups, respectively (P=NS). The LapNx donors had a significantly decreased estimated blood loss, shorter time until resumption of oral intake, decreased postoperative pain (in terms of decreased analgesic requirements), shorter hospitalization, and a shorter interval until the resumption of full activities (P<0.05 for all). In addition, the LapNx group donors returned to work sooner than the OpenNx group (3.9+/-1.6 wk vs. 6.4+/-3.1 wk, respectively) (P=0.024). Four individuals agreed to donate a kidney only after learning of the availability of the laparoscopic approach. We conclude that laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy is technically feasible. In addition, it may offer significant advantages over the standard open approach in terms of patient comfort and convenience. These advantages may make live donor renal transplantation more attractive to prospective donors. The potential decrease in hospitalization and convalescence may also prove to be financially advantageous. We believe that further careful study of this procedure is warranted.
PMID: 9020322
ISSN: 0041-1337
CID: 493932

Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy: the initial 3 cases [Case Report]

Schulam, P G; Kavoussi, L R; Cheriff, A D; Averch, T D; Montgomery, R; Moore, R G; Ratner, L E
PURPOSE: Successful laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy in 3 patients is described. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The procedures were performed completely laparoscopically and the kidneys were extracted via 8 cm. infraumbilical incisions. RESULTS: In all 3 cases warm ischemic time was less than 5 minutes, and the renal vessels and ureter of the harvested kidneys were of adequate length for routine transplantation. Donors required minimal postoperative parenteral analgesia and were discharged home 1 to 3 days after the procedure. All harvested kidneys were successfully transplanted, and functioned well initially and at hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic live donor nephrectomy may be an alternative surgical modality to conventional open nephrectomy. Advantages include less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay and convalescence, and a more desirable cosmetic result. Additionally, these advantages may encourage more individuals to consider live donation, resulting in an increase in organ supply.
PMID: 8618273
ISSN: 0022-5347
CID: 493992

Renal transplantation in patients with sickle cell nephropathy [Case Report]

Montgomery, R; Zibari, G; Hill, G S; Ratner, L E
PMID: 8091488
ISSN: 0041-1337
CID: 1981362