Ethics Consultation for Adult Solid Organ Transplantation Candidates and Recipients: A Single Centre Experience

Solid Organ Transplantation for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities – Ethical Considerations and a Call for Clarity

Pediatric transplant centers are faced with the difficult task of maximizing the benefit of organs donated for transplantation while also ensuring that all patients undergoing transplant evaluation are fairly considered for this life-saving therapy. Children with neurodevelopmental disabilities are a complex patient population that on occasion may face the need for a solid organ transplant. Several concerns exist regarding transplantation in this population, yet standard transplant inclusion and exclusion criteria do not exist. Here we explore important factors regarding organ transplantation for children with neurodevelopmental disorders, including patient outcomes, quality of life considerations, and the fundamental ethical principles underlying this complex medical decision-making.

Patient participation in Dutch ethics support: practice, ideals, challenges and recommendations-a national survey

Background

Patient participation in clinical ethics support services (CESS) has been marked as an important issue. There seems to be a wide variety of practices globally, but extensive theoretical or empirical studies on the matter are missing. Scarce publications indicate that, in Europe, patient participation in CESS (fused and abbreviated hereafter as: PP) varies from region to region, and per type of support. Practices vary from being non-existent, to patients being a full conversation partner. This contrasts with North America, where PP seems more or less standard. While PP seems to be on the rise in Europe, there is no data to confirm this. This study sought a deep understanding of both habits and the attitudes towards PP in the Netherlands, including respondents’ practical and normative perspectives on the matter.

Methods and Results

We developed a national survey on PP for Dutch CESS staff. Our survey comprised a total of 25 open and close-ended questions, focused on four topics related to PP (1) goals of CESS, (2) status quo of PP, (3) ideas and ideals concerning PP, and (4) obstacles for PP.

Discussion

The four most important findings were that: (1) Patient participation in Dutch CESS is far from standard. (2) Views on patient participation are very much intertwined with the goals of ethics support. (3) Hesitations, fears and perceived obstacles for PP were not on principle and (4) Most respondents see PP as a positive opportunity, yet requiring additional training, practical guidance and experience.

Conclusions

Various normative reasons require PP. However, PP seems far from standard and somewhat rare in Dutch CESS settings. Our respondents did not raise many principled objections to PP. Instead, reasons for the lack of PP are intertwined with viewpoints on the goals of CESS, which seemingly focus on supporting health care professionals (HCPs). Training and practical guidance was thought to be helpful for gaining experience for both CESS staff and HCPs.

Ethical considerations during a pioneering surgical procedure: porcine cardiac xenotransplantation

Preclinical advances in life-sustaining porcine cardiac xenotransplantation from donor pigs to baboons have paved the way for the performance of porcine cardiac xenotransplantation in a human. This procedure was performed with emergency use authorisation granted by the United States Food and Drug Administration under the umbrella of investigational new drug use on compassionate grounds. The patient was denied candidacy for durable mechanical circulatory support and heart transplantation as a result of non-adherence to medical advice.

Successful porcine cardiac xenotransplantation in humans will significantly increase the availability of potential donor organs for long-term management of end-stage heart failure. Human porcine cardiac xenotransplantation is associated with ethical conflicts encompassing multiple ethical principles which are not mutually exclusive and are sometimes conflicting. This article focuses on some of the ethical conflicts encountered in relation to the use of mechanical circulatory support, pretransplant evaluation, shared decision making during informed consent, infectious disease risk, preclinical and clinical testing, and the role of regulatory bodies during performance of the first human porcine cardiac xenotransplantation.

An increase in human trials of xenotransplantation procedures is imminent. Potential ethical conflicts associated with xenotransplantation should be addressed appropriately.

Delayed mortality among solid organ transplant recipients hospitalized for COVID-19

INTRODUCTION

Most studies of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with COVID-19 focus on outcomes within one month of illness onset. Delayed mortality in SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 has not been fully examined.

METHODS

We used data from a multicenter registry to calculate mortality by 90 days following initial SARS-CoV-2 detection in SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19 and developed multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models to compare risk factors for death by days 28 and 90.

RESULTS

Vital status at day 90 was available for 936 of 1117 (84%) SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19: 190 of 936 (20%) died by 28 days and an additional 56 of 246 deaths (23%) occurred between days 29 and 90. Factors associated with mortality by day 90 included: age > 65 years [aHR 1.8 (1.3-2.4), p =<0.001], lung transplant (vs. non-lung transplant) [aHR 1.5 (1.0-2.3), p=0.05], heart failure [aHR 1.9 (1.2-2.9), p=0.006], chronic lung disease [aHR 2.3 (1.5-3.6), p<0.001] and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m 2 [aHR 1.5 (1.1-2.0), p=0.02]. These associations were similar for mortality by day 28. Compared to diagnosis during early 2020 (March 1-June 19, 2020), diagnosis during late 2020 (June 20-December 31, 2020) was associated with lower mortality by day 28 [aHR 0.7 (0.5-1.0, p=0.04] but not by day 90 [aHR 0.9 (0.7-1.3), p=0.61].

CONCLUSIONS

In SOT recipients hospitalized for COVID-19, >20% of deaths occurred between 28 and 90 days following SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis. Future investigations should consider extending follow-up duration to 90 days for more complete mortality assessment.