Kidney TransplantationDOVIREINNCT02830568
Medical Economic Evaluation and of Quality of Life of the Kidney Living Donors.
An observational study of Kidney Transplantation, run by Central Hospital, Nancy, France at 24 sites in France.
Trial summary
The main objective of this multicentre study is to conduct the evaluation of cost-efficiency of various techniques of kidney taking with regard the quality of life of the kidney living donors. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Kidney Transplantation
- What is being tested?
- open donor nephrectomy, standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 268 participants
- Where
- 24 sitesFrance
- Study dates
- Jun 2010to Jul 2013
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Couples living donor - receiver of the services of urology and nephrology of 24 CHU in France practicing one of three techniques : * Classic surgical taking by lombotomie : Besançon, Bicêtre, Caen, Lille, Marseille, Strasbourg, Tenon; * Taking by coeliosurgery pure or hand-assisted : Clermont-Ferrand, Créteil, Foch, Grenoble, La Pitié Salpêtrière, Lyon Sud, Montpellier, Nantes, Necker,Saint-Etienne,Saint-Louis,Toulouse, Rouen; * Coeliosurgical taking assisted by robot : Nancy, Nice, Lyon, Tours.
Who may be able to join
- The receiver is registered on the ABM list;
- The receiver is on dialysis or in preterminal renal insufficiency;
- The donor is a member of the circle of acquaintances of the receiver.
Who cannot join
- Risk of difficulties of follow-up during 3 months following the transplant (ex: patient not living in France);
- Refusal of participation of the donor.
Trial locations and contacts
24 sites in 1 country.
24 sites in 1 country
France24 sites
CHU Saint Jacques de Besançon
Besançon, 25030
CHU Côte de Nacre de CAEN
Caen, 14000
CHU Montpied de Clermont-Ferrand
Clermont-Ferrand, 63003
CHU Henri Mondor
Créteil, 94010
CHU Hôpital Michallon de Grenoble
Grenoble, 38043
CHU Bicêtre
Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, 94275
Hôpital Claude Huriez
Lille, 59000
CHU Lyon Sud
Lyon, 69000
Hôpital Edouard Herriot de Lyon
Lyon, 69437
CHU Hôpital de la Conception
Marseille, 13274
CHU Lapeyronie
Montpellier, 34295
CHU Brabois
Nancy, 54000
CHU Hôtel Dieu
Nantes, 44093
CHU Pasteur
Nice, 06002
Hôpital Necker
Paris, 75015
Hôpital Pitié Salpêtrière
Paris, 75651
Hôpital Saint-Louis
Paris, 75970
Hôpital Tenon
Paris, 75970
Hôpital Charles Nicolle
Rouen, 76038
CHU Saint Etienne
Saint-Etienne, 42000
CHU Hautepierre
Strasbourg, 67091
CMC Foch
Suresnes, 92151
Hôpital de Rangueil
Toulouse, 31059
CHU Bretonneau
Tours, 37000
About this study
Official title: Medical Economic Evaluation and of Quality of Life of the Kidney Living Donors. Comparison of the Taking of Kidney by cœliosurgery (Pure or " Hand-assisted "), by cœliosurgery Assisted by Robot and by the Classic Technique of Open Donor Nephrectomy.
The main objective of this multicentre study is to conduct the evaluation of cost-efficiency of various techniques of kidney taking with regard the quality of life of the kidney living donors.
It will allow to compare three techniques of taking (open donor nephrectomy, cœliosurgery pure or " hand-assisted " and cœliosurgery assisted by robot) and to determine their respective advantages in quality of life, then their medico-economic consequences in a cost-efficiency approach from the point of view of the society.
Read more
The evaluation will concern the donor and the receiver followed three months after the taking.
The open donor nephrectomy will be the technique of reference with which will be compared the two others.
Read the detailed description
Context : The most efficient treatment of the terminal chronic renal insufficiency is the renal transplantation, but in spite of the realization of more than 2000 transplants a year in France, the waiting list increases every year in a important way. The decrease of the offer of transplants from deathly donors led numerous countries to develop the renal transplant from alive donors. This type of transplantation represents in 2007 only 8,1 % of transplants in France (report of ABM on 2007), but the deficit in renal transplants and the new laws of bioethics should increase this donation (it represents until 70 % of the renal transplantations in certain centres of North America or the Northern Europe).
Although the French urology is at the top of the laparoscopic technique, the classic surgical taking by lombotomie stays the reference technique, practised by 58 % of the centres, with for the patient its consequences in terms of pain, of duration of hospitalization, convalescence and possible side effects. The development of the taking by cœliosurgery, mini-invasive technique, allowed to increase the number of wishes of organ donation in the centres which developed it. It is however a difficult technical gesture, requiring an important experience. This technique has the inconvenience of a more painful scar and more subject to complications than the section known pubic of "Pfannenstiel" used for the taking by pure cœliosurgery.
The surgical robot Da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, California), with a 3D mink, the joints of the instruments inside the body, the reduction of the movements, the best ergonomics, improves the precision of the cœlioscopic gesture, but has a sharply upper cost. The CHU of Nancy was the pioneer in Europe to develop this technique from 2002, with very encouraging results on a series from now on more than 80 patients.
Only retrospective studies compared the quality of life between these techniques, and in spite of the major financial impacts (10 years of dialysis represent 100 K€; the price of the robot is of 1700 K€) and the important differences of quality of life according to these various surgical approaches, no prospective comparative medico-economic study was realized up to now. In France, where the hospital bears the load of all the expenses concerning the donor, including its daily allowances during its medical certificate, the shortening of the hospitalization and of the convalescence of the donor as well as the results improved by the transplantation at the receiver of a kidney living donor would allow a fast amortization of these expensive technologies.
Main objective : To compare the cost and the efficiency of the three techniques of taking of kidney living donor.
Main assessment criterion : The quality of life of the donor tested by generic measuring instruments EUROQOL and SF-36 (both to D-1 (the day before the renal transplantation), D4 (4 days after) and D90 (3 months after) and SF-36 to D-1 and D90). It will be realized at the donor's in preoperative (D-1), in postoperative (D4) and in the visit of follow-up in 3 months (D90). It will be also collected at the receiver's in preoperative (D-1), postoperative immediate (D4) and in the visit of follow-up in 3 months (D90).
The combination with the cost estimate will allow to build the marginal cost-efficiency ratio.
Secondary objectives envisaged:
- The evaluation of the quality of life of the receiver by measuring instrument becomes generic EUROQOL and SF-36 to D-1, D4 (only Euroqol) and D90.
- The comparison of the comfort of the surgeon and his physical and psychic investment by index card(form) of specific evaluation (Borg and NASA-TLX).
- The comparison of the coelio-surgical techniques : pure coelioscopy, coelioscopy " hand-assisted " and coelioscopy assisted by robot will concern the quality of life and the marginal cost-efficiency ratio.
- Conditions
- Kidney Transplantation
- Being tested
- open donor nephrectomy, standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy
- Keywords
- Kidney transplantation, Surgical procedures, Kidney living donors, Quality of life
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
open donor nephrectomyProcedure or surgery
open donor nephrectomy
standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomyProcedure or surgery
standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy
laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomyProcedure or surgery
laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| couples kidney living donor - receiver | Three groups for each technique of taking of kidney :
1. open donor nephrectomy
2. standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy
3. laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy Receives: Procedure: open donor nephrectomy; Procedure: standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy; Procedure: laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Quality of life of the donor
Quality of life of the donor as measured by EUROQOL (score 0 to 1) and SF 36 self-administered questionnaires (score 0 to 100 in each of 8 dimensions , at D-1 (the day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy).
biological values of the donor and the receiver
Measured: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Secondary outcomes (6)
Sociodemographic data
At D-1 (the day before nephrectomy), sociodemographic data are collected
Measured: D-1, the day before nephrectomy
Comfort, physical and mental investment of the surgeon measured by the Borg and the NASA-TLX scale
The Borg scale consists of 7 questions corresponding to the level of discomfort in 7 body segments of the surgeon with responses ranging from 0 (no discomfort) to 10 (very very strong discomfort). The surgeon is questioned every 30 minutes during the surgery. The NASA-TLX scale consists in 8 questions about physical and mental investment with responses ranging from 0 (low) to 100 (high). The surgeon completes this scale immediately at the end of the surgical procedure.
Measured: Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
Biological values of the donor and the receiver
Blood count and serum electrolyte levels are collected. biological values of the donor and the receiver
Measured: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Treatments administered to the donor
Treatments administered to the donor from D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor) to D90 (90 days after nephrectomy).
Measured: D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Medical exams performed on the donor
Medical exams performed on the donor from D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor) to D90 (90 days after nephrectomy).
Measured: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Information on surgical technique employed to achieve nephrectomy and description of the graft.
Type of surgery (open donor nephrectomy, standard or hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomyor laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy), Duration of surgery and of ischemia and description of the graft.
Measured: Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Jul 2016 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2010
- Primary completionJul 2013
- Study completionJul 2013
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Kidney TransplantationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Central Hospital, Nancy, FranceThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 268 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Central Hospital, Nancy, France
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02830568
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 10.039
- Acronym
- DOVIREIN
- Status last verified
- May 2010
- First submitted
- 7 Jun 2010
- Last updated
- 13 Jul 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Achit H, Guillemin F, Karam G, Ladriere M, Baumann C, Frimat L, Hosseini K, Hubert J. Cost-effectiveness of four living-donor nephrectomy techniques from a hospital perspective. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2020 Nov 1;35(11):2004-2012. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfz143.
PubMed 31377771
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Jul 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Medical Economic Evaluation and of Quality of Life of the Kidney Living Donors. Comparison of the Taking of Kidney by cœliosurgery (Pure or " Hand-assisted "), by cœliosurgery Assisted by Robot and by the Classic Technique of Open Donor Nephrectomy.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02830568
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- DOVIREIN / 10.039
- Conditions
- Kidney Transplantation
- Keywords
- Kidney transplantation, Surgical procedures, Kidney living donors, Quality of life
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 268 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Central Hospital, Nancy, FranceUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2010
- Primary completion
- Jul 2013 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2013 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jul 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The main objective of this multicentre study is to conduct the evaluation of cost-efficiency of various techniques of kidney taking with regard the quality of life of the kidney living donors.
It will allow to compare three techniques of taking (open donor nephrectomy, cœliosurgery pure or " hand-assisted " and cœliosurgery assisted by robot) and to determine their respective advantages in quality of life, then their medico-economic consequences in a cost-efficiency approach from the point of view of the society.
The evaluation will concern the donor and the receiver followed three months after the taking.
The open donor nephrectomy will be the technique of reference with which will be compared the two others.
Detailed description
Context : The most efficient treatment of the terminal chronic renal insufficiency is the renal transplantation, but in spite of the realization of more than 2000 transplants a year in France, the waiting list increases every year in a important way. The decrease of the offer of transplants from deathly donors led numerous countries to develop the renal transplant from alive donors. This type of transplantation represents in 2007 only 8,1 % of transplants in France (report of ABM on 2007), but the deficit in renal transplants and the new laws of bioethics should increase this donation (it represents until 70 % of the renal transplantations in certain centres of North America or the Northern Europe).
Although the French urology is at the top of the laparoscopic technique, the classic surgical taking by lombotomie stays the reference technique, practised by 58 % of the centres, with for the patient its consequences in terms of pain, of duration of hospitalization, convalescence and possible side effects. The development of the taking by cœliosurgery, mini-invasive technique, allowed to increase the number of wishes of organ donation in the centres which developed it. It is however a difficult technical gesture, requiring an important experience. This technique has the inconvenience of a more painful scar and more subject to complications than the section known pubic of "Pfannenstiel" used for the taking by pure cœliosurgery.
The surgical robot Da Vinci (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, California), with a 3D mink, the joints of the instruments inside the body, the reduction of the movements, the best ergonomics, improves the precision of the cœlioscopic gesture, but has a sharply upper cost. The CHU of Nancy was the pioneer in Europe to develop this technique from 2002, with very encouraging results on a series from now on more than 80 patients.
Only retrospective studies compared the quality of life between these techniques, and in spite of the major financial impacts (10 years of dialysis represent 100 K€; the price of the robot is of 1700 K€) and the important differences of quality of life according to these various surgical approaches, no prospective comparative medico-economic study was realized up to now. In France, where the hospital bears the load of all the expenses concerning the donor, including its daily allowances during its medical certificate, the shortening of the hospitalization and of the convalescence of the donor as well as the results improved by the transplantation at the receiver of a kidney living donor would allow a fast amortization of these expensive technologies.
Main objective : To compare the cost and the efficiency of the three techniques of taking of kidney living donor.
Main assessment criterion : The quality of life of the donor tested by generic measuring instruments EUROQOL and SF-36 (both to D-1 (the day before the renal transplantation), D4 (4 days after) and D90 (3 months after) and SF-36 to D-1 and D90). It will be realized at the donor's in preoperative (D-1), in postoperative (D4) and in the visit of follow-up in 3 months (D90). It will be also collected at the receiver's in preoperative (D-1), postoperative immediate (D4) and in the visit of follow-up in 3 months (D90).
The combination with the cost estimate will allow to build the marginal cost-efficiency ratio.
Secondary objectives envisaged:
- The evaluation of the quality of life of the receiver by measuring instrument becomes generic EUROQOL and SF-36 to D-1, D4 (only Euroqol) and D90.
- The comparison of the comfort of the surgeon and his physical and psychic investment by index card(form) of specific evaluation (Borg and NASA-TLX).
- The comparison of the coelio-surgical techniques : pure coelioscopy, coelioscopy " hand-assisted " and coelioscopy assisted by robot will concern the quality of life and the marginal cost-efficiency ratio.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| couples kidney living donor - receiver | – | Procedure: open donor nephrectomy, Procedure: standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, Procedure: laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomyThree groups for each technique of taking of kidney : 1. open donor nephrectomy 2. standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy 3. laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Couples living donor - receiver of the services of urology and nephrology of 24 CHU in France practicing one of three techniques : * Classic surgical taking by lombotomie : Besançon, Bicêtre, Caen, Lille, Marseille, Strasbourg, Tenon; * Taking by coeliosurgery pure or hand-assisted : Clermont-Ferrand, Créteil, Foch, Grenoble, La Pitié Salpêtrière, Lyon Sud, Montpellier, Nantes, Necker,Saint-Etienne,Saint-Louis,Toulouse, Rouen; * Coeliosurgical taking assisted by robot : Nancy, Nice, Lyon, Tours.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- The receiver is registered on the ABM list;
- The receiver is on dialysis or in preterminal renal insufficiency;
- The donor is a member of the circle of acquaintances of the receiver.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Risk of difficulties of follow-up during 3 months following the transplant (ex: patient not living in France);
- Refusal of participation of the donor.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| open donor nephrectomyopen donor nephrectomy | Procedure or surgery | couples kidney living donor - receiver |
| standard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomystandard and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy | Procedure or surgery | couples kidney living donor - receiver |
| laparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomylaparoscopic robotic-assisted nephrectomy | Procedure or surgery | couples kidney living donor - receiver |
Primary outcome
Quality of life of the donor
Time frame: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Quality of life of the donor as measured by EUROQOL (score 0 to 1) and SF 36 self-administered questionnaires (score 0 to 100 in each of 8 dimensions , at D-1 (the day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy). biological values of the donor and the receiver
6 secondary outcomes
Sociodemographic data
Time frame: D-1, the day before nephrectomy
Comfort, physical and mental investment of the surgeon measured by the Borg and the NASA-TLX scale
Time frame: Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
Biological values of the donor and the receiver
Time frame: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Treatments administered to the donor
Time frame: D0 (the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Medical exams performed on the donor
Time frame: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D2 (2 days after nephrectomy) D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)
Information on surgical technique employed to achieve nephrectomy and description of the graft.
Time frame: Day 0, the actual day of nephrectomy for each donor
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Jul 2016.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31377771Achit H, Guillemin F, Karam G, Ladriere M, Baumann C, Frimat L, Hosseini K, Hubert J. Cost-effectiveness of four living-donor nephrectomy techniques from a hospital perspective. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2020 Nov 1;35(11):2004-2012. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfz143.
Related trials for Kidney Transplantation
Enrolling by invitation
Online Exercise Program for Transplant Patients: A Pilot Study
Kidney Transplantation, Physical Function
RecruitingPhase 2
A Study of Mezagitamab in Adults With Late Antibody-Mediated Rejection (AMR) After a Kidney Transplant
Antibody-Mediated Rejection (AMR)
Not yet recruiting
Hypothermic Kidney Machine Perfusion With Omnisol
End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD), Kidney Transplant
Not yet recruitingEarly Phase 1
Biomarker-Guided Mycophenolate Mofetil Elimination in Low-Risk Older Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients
Kidney Transplant Recipient
Recruiting
Non-Invasive Monitoring of Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipients and Immunosuppression Personalization: an Open-labeled Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study
Pediatric Kidney Disease, Transplant;Failure,Kidney
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
24 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Kidney Transplantation, run by Central Hospital, Nancy, France at 24 sites in France.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Jul 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 24 sites in France. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Quality of life of the donor (time frame: D-1 (day before nephrectomy), D4 (4 days after nephrectomy) and D90 (90 days after nephrectomy)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02830568, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Jul 2016.