Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Limited data are available on organ donation practices and recipient outcomes, particularly when comparing donors who experienced cardiac arrest and received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) followed by veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) decannulation, versus those who experienced cardiac arrest without receiving ECPR. This study aims to explore organ donation practices and outcomes post-ECPR to enhance our understanding of the donation potential after cardiac arrest. Methods We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study using data from the Japan Organ Transplant Network database, covering all deceased organ donors between July 17, 2010, and August 31, 2022. We included donors who experienced at least one episode of cardiac arrest. During the study period, patients undergoing ECMO treatment were not eligible for a legal diagnosis of brain death. We compared the timeframes associated with each donor’s management and the long-term graft outcomes of recipients between ECPR and non-ECPR groups. Results Among 370 brain death donors with an episode of cardiac arrest, 26 (7.0%) received ECPR and 344 (93.0%) did not; the majority were due to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. The median duration of veno-arterial ECMO support after ECPR was 3 days. Patients in the ECPR group had significantly longer intervals from admission to organ procurement compared to those not receiving ECPR (13 vs. 9 days, P  = 0.005). Lung graft survival rates were significantly lower in the ECPR group (log-rank test P  = 0.009), with no significant differences in other organ graft survival rates. Of 160 circulatory death donors with an episode of cardiac arrest, 27 (16.9%) received ECPR and 133 (83.1%) did not. Time intervals from admission to organ procurement following circulatory death and graft survival showed no significant differences between ECPR and non-ECPR groups. The number of organs donated was similar between the ECPR and non-ECPR groups, regardless of brain or circulatory death. Conclusions This nationwide study reveals that lung graft survival was lower in recipients from ECPR-treated donors, highlighting the need for targeted research and protocol adjustments in post-ECPR organ donation.

An important argument against prohibiting organ sales is that it removes the best option available to individuals in dire circumstances. However, this line of reasoning fails to recognise that selling a kidney on a regulated market is only the best option in a very narrow comparison, where a regulated organ market is compared with banning organ sales. Once we acknowledge this narrowness, selling a kidney is not the best option. This paves the way for a distributive justice-based critique of the ‘best option’ argument for organ markets, which illuminates that organ markets should be compared with a broader set of alternatives. If providing the option of selling a kidney is not the best option, but rather the best option we are willing to provide, and one which means that many people will remain in poverty and unjust circumstances, then this reflects poorly on those societies willing to offer only this option and not a better one.

Over the past decade in the United States, nearly 6,000 people a year have died waiting for organ transplants. In 2003 alone, only 20,000 out of the 83,000 waiting for transplants received them--in anyone's eyes, a tragedy. Many of these deaths could have been prevented, and many more lives saved, were it not for the almost universal moral hand-wringing over the concept of selling human organs. Bioethicist Mark Cherry explores the why of these well-intentioned misperceptions and legislation and boldly deconstructs the roadblocks that are standing in the way of restoring health to thousands of people. If most Americans accept the notion that the market is the most efficient means to distribute resources, why should body parts be excluded? Kidney for Sale by Owner contends that the market is indeed a legitimate—and humane—way to procure and distribute human organs. Cherry stakes the claim that it may be even more just, and more compatible with many Western religious and philosophical traditions, than the current charity-based system now in place. He carefully examines arguments against a market for body parts, including assertions based on the moral views of John Locke, Immanuel Kant, and Thomas Aquinas, and shows these claims to be steeped in myth, oversimplification, and contorted logic. Rather than focusing on purported human exploitation and the irrational \"moral repugnance\" of selling organs, Cherry argues that we should focus on saving lives. Following on the thinking of the philosopher Robert Nozick, he demonstrates that, with regard to body parts, the important core humanitarian values of equality, liberty, altruism, social solidarity, human dignity, and, ultimately, improved health care are more successfully supported by a regulated market rather than by well meant, but misguided, prohibitions.

In a recent article, Albertsen both elaborates the best option argument for regulated markets and levels a justice-based objection to kidney sales. In the present article, I show that Albertsen has crucially misunderstood the best option argument. It is not a defence of kidney sales, as Albertsen claims. It is a reply to an objection. The objection, perennial in the debate, opposes kidney sales on the grounds that sellers would be harmed. The best option argument—proving that prohibitions tend to set back the interests of those denied their preferred option—shows this thinking to be confused. If sound, the best option argument dramatically undercuts any attempt to oppose a market citing would-be sellers’ interests.

The use of kidneys from controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors has the potential to markedly increase kidney transplants performed. However, this potential is not being realized because of concerns that DCD kidneys are inferior to those from donation after brain-death (DBD) donors. The United Kingdom has developed a large and successful controlled DCD kidney transplant program that has allowed for a substantial increase in kidney transplant numbers. Here we describe recent trends in DCD kidney donor activity in the United Kingdom, outline aspects of the donation process, and describe donor selection and allocation of DCD kidneys. Previous UK Transplant Registry analyses have shown that while DCD kidneys are more susceptible to cold ischemic injury and have a higher incidence of delayed graft function, short- and medium-term transplant outcomes are similar in recipients of kidneys from DCD and DBD donors. We present an updated, extended UK registry analysis showing that longer-term transplant outcomes in DCD donor kidneys are also similar to those for DBD donor kidneys, and that transplant outcomes for kidneys from expanded-criteria DCD donors are no less favorable than for expanded-criteria DBD donors. Accordingly, the selection criteria for use of kidneys from DCD donors should be the same as those used for DBD donors. The UK experience suggests that wider international development of DCD kidney transplantation programs will help address the global shortage of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation.

[...] the proportion of elderly donors in the past decade is significantly higher in Spain than in most other nations.7 In 2009, the average age of donor's in Spain was 54.6 years, and 45% were older than 60 years.8 Acceptance of extended criteria (eg, use of donors age >65 years or with a history of infectious disease or tumours) leads not only to higher rates of transplantation but also to lower effectiveness scores (eg, number of recovered and transplanted organs per deceased donor, or proportion of discarded organs after extraction).7 Worldwide, kidneys from elderly donors are usually allocated to elderly recipients. Since the mean age of deceased donors in Spain is high, this practice entails a shortage of appropriate kidneys for young recipients,9 which is one of the reasons that justifies the growth in living donation (which in Spain rose by 50% from 2008 to 2009).8 Also, because the proportion of organs that cannot be transplanted increases with donor age, some organs procured from extended-criteria donors prove to be unsuitable for transplantation (eg, they do not fulfil quality and security requirements for transplantation).7 In 2009, no organs could be transplanted from 206 of 1606 donors (12.8%).8 Some aspects of the Spanish Model have been described less extensively and raise some ethical issues.

The revised Organ Transplant Law came into effect in Japan in July 2010. The law allows for organ procurement from brain-dead individuals, including children, with family consent from subjects who had not previously rejected organ donation. Nevertheless, the number of cadaveric organ donations has not increased as expected. The Spanish Model is widely known as the most successful system in the field of organ donation. The system includes an earlier referral of possible donors to the transplant coordination teams, a new family-based approach and care methods, and the development of additional training courses aimed at specific groups of professionals, which are supported by their corresponding societies. South Korea, a country which neighbors Japan, has recently succeeded in increasing the rates of organ donation by introducing several systems, such as incentive programs, an organ procurement organization, a donor registry, and a system to facilitate potential donor referral. In this review, we present the current status of organ donation in Japan and also explore various factors that may help to improve the country’s low donation rate based on the experiences of other developed countries.

Organ shortage for transplantation remains a worldwide serious problem for kidney patients with end-stage renal failure, and several countries have tried different models to address this issue. Iran has 20 years of experience with one such model that involves the active role of the government and charity foundations. Patients with a desperate demand for a kidney have given rise to a black market of brokers and other forms of organ commercialism only accessible to those with sufficient financial resources. The current Iranian model has enabled most of the Iranian kidney transplant candidates, irrespective of socioeconomic class, to have access to kidney transplantation. The Iranian government has committed a large budget through funding hospital and staff at the Ministry of Health and Medical Education by supporting the brain death donation (BDD) program or redirecting part of the budget of living unrelated renal donation (LURD) to the BDD program. It has been shown that it did not prevent the development and progression of a BDD program. However, the LURD program is characterized by several controversial procedures (e.g., confrontation of donor and recipient at the end of the evaluation procedure along with some financial interactions) that should be ethically reviewed. Operational weaknesses such as the lack of a registration system and long-term follow-up of the donors are identified as the ‘Achilles heel of the model’.

Purpose To provide a practical overview of the management of the potential organ donor in the intensive care unit. Methods Seven areas of donor management were considered for this review: hemodynamic management; fluids and electrolytes; respiratory management; endocrine management; temperature management; anaemia and coagulation; infection management. For each subchapter, a narrative review was conducted. Results and conclusions Most elements in the current recommendations and guidelines are based on pathophysiological reasoning, epidemiological observations, or extrapolations from general ICU management strategies, and not on evidence from randomized controlled trials. The cardiorespiratory management of brain-dead donors is very similar to the management of critically ill patients, and the same applies to the management of anaemia and coagulation. Central diabetes insipidus is of particular concern, and should be diagnosed based on clinical criteria. Depending on the degree of vasopressor dependency, it can be treated with intermittent desmopressin or continuous vasopressin, intravenously. Temperature management of the donor is an area of uncertainty, but it appears reasonable to strive for a core temperature of > 35 °C. The indications and controversies regarding endocrine therapies, in particular thyroid hormone replacement therapy, and corticosteroid therapy, are discussed. The potential donor should be assessed clinically for infections, and screening tests for specific infections are an essential part of donor management. Although the rate of infection transmission from donor to receptor is low, certain infections are still a formal contraindication to organ donation. However, new antiviral drugs and strategies now allow organ donation from certain infected donors to be done safely.

In May 2020, England implemented soft 'opt-out' or 'deemed consent' for deceased donation with the intention of raising consent rates. However, this coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, making it difficult to assess the early impact of the law change. Wales and Scotland changed their organ donation legislation to implement soft opt-out systems in 2015 and 2021 respectively. This study provides a descriptive analysis of changes in consent and transplant rates for deceased organ donation in England, Scotland and Wales. Logistic regression and descriptive trend analysis were employed to assess the probability of a patient who died in critical care becoming a donor, and to report consent rates using data, respectively, from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) in England from 1 April 2014 to 30 September 2021, and from the Potential Donor Audit for England, Scotland and Wales from April 2010 to June 2023. The number of eligible donors in April-June 2020 were 56.5%, 59.3% and 57.6% lower in England, Scotland and Wales relative to April-June 2019 (pre-pandemic). By April-June 2023, the number of eligible donors had recovered to 87.4%, 64.2% and 110.3%, respectively, of their levels in 2019. The consent rate in England, Scotland and Wales reduced from 68.3%, 63.0% and 63.6% in April-June 2019 to 63.2%, 60.5% and 56.3% in April-June 2023. While the UK organ donation system shows signs of recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of eligible potential donors and consent rates remain below their pre-pandemic levels.