The thin line between life and death

Base excess and lactate as prognostic indicators for patients treated by extra corporeal life support after out hospital cardiac arrest due to acute coronary syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether values of arterial base excess or lactate taken 3 h after starting ECLS indicate poor prognosis and if this can be used as a screening tool to follow Extra Corporeal Life Support after Out Hospital Cardiac Arrest due to acute coronary syndrome.

DESIGN

Single Centre retrospective observational study.

SETTING

University teaching hospital general adult intensive care unit.

PATIENTS

15 consecutive patients admitted to the intensive care unit after refractory Out Hospital Cardiac Arrest due to acute coronary syndrome treated by Extra Corporeal Life Support.

INTERVENTIONS

Arterial base excess and lactate concentrations were measured immediately after starting ECLS and every 3 h after.

RESULTS

Both base excess and arterial lactate measured 3 h after starting ECLS effectively predict multi-organ failure occurrence and mortality in the following 21 h (area under the curve on receiver operating characteristic analysis of 0.97, 0.95 respectively). The best predictive values were obtained with a base excess level measured 3 h after starting ECLS of less than -10 mmol/l and lactate concentrations greater than 12 mmol/l. The combination of these two markers measured 3 h after starting ECLS predicted multiorgan failure occurrence and mortality in the following 21 h with a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination of base excess and lactate, measured 3 h after starting ECLS, can be used to predict multiorgan failure occurrence and mortality in the following 21 h in patients admitted to an intensive care unit for refractory Out Hospital Cardiac Arrest due to acute coronary syndrome treated by Extra Corporeal Life Support. These parameters can be obtained simply and rapidly and help in the decision process to continue ECLS for refractory CA.

Protocols for uncontrolled donation after circulatory death: a systematic review of international guidelines, practices and transplant outcomes

INTRODUCTION

A chronic shortage of organs remains the main factor limiting organ transplantation. Many countries have explored the option of uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) in order to expand the donor pool. Little is known regarding the variability of practices and outcomes between existing protocols. This systematic review addresses this knowledge gap informing policy makers, researchers, and clinicians for future protocol implementation.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar electronic databases from 2005 to March 2015 as well as the reference lists of selected studies, abstracts, unpublished reports, personal libraries, professional organization reports, and government agency statements on uDCD. We contacted leading authors and organizations to request their protocols and guidelines. Two reviewers extracted main variables. In studies reporting transplant outcomes, we added type, quantity, quality of organs procured, and complications reported. Internal validity and the quality of the studies reporting outcomes were assessed, as were the methodological rigour and transparency in which a guideline was developed. The review was included in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (Prospero, CRD42014015258).

RESULTS

Six guidelines and 18 outcome studies were analysed. The six guidelines are based on limited evidence and major differences exist between them at each step of the uDCD process. The outcome studies report good results for kidney, liver, and lung transplantation with high discard rates for livers.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite procedural, medical, economic, legal, and ethical challenges, the uDCD strategy is a viable option for increasing the organ donation pool. Variations in practice and heterogeneity of outcomes preclude a meta-analysis and prevented the linking of outcomes to specific uDCD protocols. Further standardization of protocols and outcomes is required, as is further research into the role of extracorporeal resuscitation and other novel therapies for treatment of some refractory cardiac arrest. It is essential to ensure the maintenance of trust in uDCD programs by health professionals and the public.

Ethical and legal implications of elective ventilation and organ transplantation: "medicalization" of dying versus medical mission

A critical controversy surrounds the type of allowable interventions to be carried out in patients who are potential organ donors, in an attempt to improve organ perfusion and successful transplantation. The main goal is to transplant an organ in conditions as close as possible to its physiological live state. “Elective ventilation” (EV), that is, the use of ventilation for the sole purpose of retrieving the organs of patients close to death, is an option which offsets the shortage of organ donation. We have analyzed the legal context of the dying process of the organ donor and the feasibility of EV in the Italian context. There is no legal framework regulating the practice of EV, neither is any real information given to the general public. A public debate has yet to be initiated. In the Italian cultural and legislative scenario, we believe that, under some circumstances (i.e., the expressed wishes of the patient, even in the form of advance directives), the use of EV does not violate the principle of beneficence. We believe that the crux of the matter lies in the need to explore the real determination and will of the patient and his/her orientation towards the specific aim of organ donation.

Donation after cardiocirculatory death: a call for a moratorium pending full public disclosure and fully informed consent

Many believe that the ethical problems of donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) have been "worked out" and that it is unclear why DCD should be resisted. In this paper we will argue that DCD donors may not yet be dead, and therefore that organ donation during DCD may violate the dead donor rule. We first present a description of the process of DCD and the standard ethical rationale for the practice. We then present our concerns with DCD, including the following: irreversibility of absent circulation has not occurred and the many attempts to claim it has have all failed; conflicts of interest at all steps in the DCD process, including the decision to withdraw life support before DCD, are simply unavoidable; potentially harmful premortem interventions to preserve organ utility are not justifiable, even with the help of the principle of double effect; claims that DCD conforms with the intent of the law and current accepted medical standards are misleading and inaccurate; and consensus statements by respected medical groups do not change these arguments due to their low quality including being plagued by conflict of interest. Moreover, some arguments in favor of DCD, while likely true, are "straw-man arguments," such as the great benefit of organ donation. The truth is that honesty and trustworthiness require that we face these problems instead of avoiding them. We believe that DCD is not ethically allowable because it abandons the dead donor rule, has unavoidable conflicts of interests, and implements premortem interventions which can hasten death. These important points have not been, but need to be fully disclosed to the public and incorporated into fully informed consent. These are tall orders, and require open public debate. Until this debate occurs, we call for a moratorium on the practice of DCD.

Usefulness of routine laboratory parameters in the decision to treat refractory cardiac arrest with extracorporeal life support

AIM

To evaluate the usefulness of routine laboratory parameters in the decision to treat refractory cardiac arrest patients with extracorporeal life support (ECLS).

METHODS

Sixty-six adults with witnessed cardiac arrest of cardiac origin unrelated to poisoning or hypothermia undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation without return of spontaneous circulation (duration: 155 min [120-180], median, [25-75%-percentiles]) were included in a prospective cohort-study. ECLS was implemented under cardiac massage, using a centrifugal pump connected to a hollow-fiber membrane-oxygenator, aiming to maintain ECLS flow ≥ 2.5 l/min and mean arterial pressure ≥ 60 mm Hg.

RESULTS

Forty-seven of 66 patients died within 24 h from multiorgan failure and massive capillary leak. Of 19/66 patients who survived ≥ 24 h with stable circulatory conditions permitting neurological evaluation, four became conscious and were transferred for further cardiac assistance, while three became organ donors. Ultimately, one patient survived without neurologic sequelae after cardiac transplantation. Using multivariate analysis, only pre-cannulation peripheral venous oxygen saturation (SpvO₂, 28% [15-52]) independently predicted inability to maintain targeted ECLS conditions ≥ 24 h (odds ratio for each 10%-decrease [95%-confidence interval]: 1.65 [1.21; 2.25], p=0.002). The area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve was 0.78 [0.63; 0.93]. SpvO₂ cut-off value of 33% was associated with a sensitivity of 0.68 [0.50; 0.83] and specificity of 0.81 [0.54; 0.96]. SpvO₂ ≤ 8%, lactate concentration ≥ 21 mmol/l, fibrinogen ≤ 0.8 g/l, and prothrombin index ≤ 11% predicted premature ECLS discontinuation with a specificity of 1.

CONCLUSION

SpvO₂ is useful to predict the inability of maintaining refractory cardiac arrest victims on ECLS without detrimental capillary leak and multiorgan failure until neurological evaluation.

Scientific, legal, and ethical challenges of end-of-life organ procurement in emergency medicine

AIM

We review (1) scientific evidence questioning the validity of declaring death and procuring organs in heart-beating (i.e., neurological standard of death) and non-heart-beating (i.e., circulatory-respiratory standard of death) donation; (2) consequences of collaborative programs realigning hospital policies to maximize access of procurement coordinators to critically and terminally ill patients as potential donors on arrival in emergency departments; and (3) ethical and legal ramifications of current practices of organ procurement on patients and their families.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant publications in peer-reviewed journals and government websites.

RESULTS

Scientific evidence undermines the biological criteria of death that underpin the definition of death in heart-beating (i.e., neurological standard) and non-heart-beating (i.e., circulatory-respiratory standard) donation. Philosophical reinterpretation of the neurological and circulatory-respiratory standards in the death statute, to avoid the appearance of organ procurement as an active life-ending intervention, lacks public and medical consensus. Collaborative programs bundle procurement coordinators together with hospital staff for a team-huddle and implement a quality improvement tool for a Rapid Assessment of Hospital Procurement Barriers in Donation. Procurement coordinators have access to critically ill patients during the course of medical treatment with no donation consent and with family or surrogates unaware of their roles. How these programs affect the medical care of these patients has not been studied.

CONCLUSIONS

Policies enforcing end-of-life organ procurement can have unintended consequences: (1) erosion of care in the patient's best interests, (2) lack of transparency, and (3) ethical and legal ramifications of flawed standards of declaring death.

Presumed consent for organ preservation in uncontrolled donation after cardiac death in the United States: a public policy with serious consequences

Organ donation after cessation of circulation and respiration, both controlled and uncontrolled, has been proposed by the Institute of Medicine as a way to increase opportunities for organ procurement. Despite claims to the contrary, both forms of controlled and uncontrolled donation after cardiac death raise significant ethical and legal issues. Identified causes for concern include absence of agreement on criteria for the declaration of death, nonexistence of universal guidelines for duration before stopping resuscitation efforts and techniques, and assumption of presumed intent to donate for the purpose of initiating temporary organ-preservation interventions when no expressed consent to donate is present. From a legal point of view, not having scientifically valid criteria of cessation of circulation and respiration for declaring death could lead to a conclusion that organ procurement itself is the proximate cause of death. Although the revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 2006 provides broad immunity to those involved in organ-procurement activities, courts have yet to provide an opinion on whether persons can be held liable for injuries arising from the determination of death itself. Preserving organs in uncontrolled donation after cardiac death requires the administration of life-support systems such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. These life-support systems can lead to return of signs of life that, in turn, have to be deliberately suppressed by the administration of pharmacological agents. Finally, allowing temporary organ-preservation interventions without expressed consent is inherently a violation of the principle of respect for a person's autonomy. Proponents of organ donation from uncontrolled donation after cardiac death, on the other hand, claim that these nonconsensual interventions enhance respect for autonomy by allowing people, through surrogate decision making, to execute their right to donate organs. However, the lack of transparency and the absence of protection of individual autonomy, for the sake of maximizing procurement opportunities, have placed the current organ-donation system of opting-in in great jeopardy. Equally as important, current policies enabling and enhancing organ procurement practices, pose challenges to the constitutional rights of individuals in a pluralistic society as these policies are founded on flawed medical standards for declaring death.

The approach to delayed resuscitation in paediatric cardiac arrest: A survey of paediatric intensivists in Canada

AIM

To determine how long a period of having had no cardiopulmonary-resuscitation (CPR) (delay time) is considered to result in subsequent futile efforts at resuscitation.

METHODS

In 2007 a survey was mailed to all 77 paediatric intensivists in Canada. Three scenarios of witnessed cardiac arrest were presented: out-of-hospital, in-hospital, and in-hospital with extracorporeal-CPR (E-CPR). Each scenario asked what delay time would make attempts at resuscitation futile for survival to hospital discharge, and for survival to hospital discharge in a better than vegetative state. Comparisons of median [inter-quartile range] used Wilcoxon-signed-rank or Friedman tests with Bonferroni corrections.

RESULTS

The response rate was 49/77 (64%). The delay time was significantly different between rhythms within all scenarios (p<.001); and was significantly shorter for survival than for better than vegetative survival (p<.006) except when E-CPR was to be used. The delay time was not significantly different between the in-hospital and out-of-hospital scenario with the same rhythms (p>.01). The delay time was significantly shorter in scenarios with asystole versus pulseless electrical activity with (p=.010) or without (p<.001) an arterial line with absent pulsation. In out-of-hospital arrest, the delay time for survival varied from 15 [10-20]min for asystole to 20 [15-20]min for pulseless electrical activity. In in-hospital scenarios, the delay time for survival varied from 10 [10-20]min for asystole, to 15 [10-20]min for most other rhythms.

CONCLUSION

A delay time of 15 [10-20] (range 5-30)min was considered futile for survival. This has implications for pronouncing death in donation after cardiac death.

Organ Procurement After Cardiocirculatory Death: A Critical Analysis

To shorten the transplantation waiting time in the United States, federal regulations have been introduced requiring hospitals to develop policies for organ donation after cardiac (or circulatory) death (DCD). The practice of DCD is invoked based on the validity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) protocol and relies on the accuracy of the University of Wisconsin (UW) evaluation tool to appropriately identify organ donors. There is little evidence to support the position that the criteria for organ procurement adopted from the UPMC protocol complies with the dead donor rule. A high false-positive rate of the UW evaluation tool can expose many dying patients to unnecessary perimortem interventions because of donation failure. The medications and/or interventions for the sole purpose of maintaining organ viability can have unintended negative consequences on the timing and quality of end-of-life care offered to organ donors. It is essential to address and manage the evolving conflict between optimal end-of-life care and the necessary sacrifices for the procurement of transplantable organs from the terminally ill. The recipients of marginal organs recovered from DCD can also suffer higher mortality and morbidity than recipients of other types of donated organs. Finally, transparent disclosure to the public of the risks involved to both organ donors and recipients may contribute to open societal debate on the ethical acceptability of DCD.