Protocolo de donación tras la muerte cardiaca controlada (donante tipo iii de Maastricht). Experiencia inicial

Kidney Transplants in Controlled Donation Following Circulatory Death, or Maastricht Type III Donors, With Abdominal Normothermic Regional Perfusion, Optimizing Functional Outcomes

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background.

Warm ischemia time and ischemia-reperfusion damage result in higher rates of delayed graft function and primary nonfunction in kidney transplants (KTs) from controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD). This study aimed to assess early and late kidney function and patient and graft survival of KT from cDCD preserved with normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) and to compare with KT from brain death donors (DBDs) and cDCD preserved with rapid recovery (RR).

Methods.

Patients who received a KT at our institution from 2012 to 2018 were included, with a minimum follow-up period of 1 y. They were categorized by donor type and conditioning methods: DBD, cDCD with NRP, and cDCD with RR. Early and late graft function, along with patient and graft survival were analyzed in all groups.

Results.

A total of 182 KT recipients were included in the study (98 DBD and 84 cDCD). Out of the cDCDs, 24 kidneys were recovered with the use of NRP and 62 with RR; 22 of the 24 kidneys were ultimately transplanted. The cDCD using NRP group showed lower rates of delayed graft function compared with the cDCD with RR group (36.3% versus 46.7%, P = 0.01). Also, primary nonfunction rates were lower in the cDCD using NRP group (4.5% versus 6.4% cDCD-RR and 10.2% DBD). Patient survival rates were >90% in all groups. No differences were found in graft survival rates at 1 y.

Conclusions.

The use of abdominal NRP improves early function recovery of KT from cDCD, making their outcomes comparable with those of DBD.

Criteria to Identify a Potential Deceased Organ Donor: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the global published literature defining a potential deceased organ donor and identifying clinical triggers for deceased organ donation identification and referral.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and Embase databases from January 2006 to September 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

All published studies containing a definition of a potential deceased organ donor and/or clinical triggers for referring a potential deceased organ donor were eligible for inclusion. Dual, independent screening was conducted of 3,857 citations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extraction was completed by one team member and verified by a second team member. Thematic content analysis was used to identify clinical criteria for potential deceased organ donation identification from the published definitions and clinical triggers.

DATA SYNTHESIS

One hundred twenty-four articles were included in the review. Criteria fell into four categories: Neurological, Medical Decision, Cardiorespiratory, and Administrative. Distinct and globally consistent sets of clinical criteria by type of deceased organ donation (neurologic death determination, controlled donation after circulatory determination of death, and uncontrolled donation after circulatory determination of death) are reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the clinical criteria sets reported will reduce ambiguity associated with the deceased organ donor identification and the subsequent referral process, potentially reducing the number of missed donors and saving lives globally through increased transplantation.

Organ donation after controlled cardiac death under Maastricht category iii: Ethical implications and end of life care

The decrease in potential donation after brain death has resulted in a need to evaluate alternative sources. Donation after cardiac death is a good option. The objectives of this article are to describe the Maastricht type iii controlled organ donation characteristics and to determine end-of-life care and the role of nurses in the donation process. In this type of donation, cardiocirculatory arrest is predictable after the limitation of life sustaining treatments. These are patients for whom there are no effective therapy options and, in the context of an organised and planned practice involving all the professionals involved in the care of the patient, the decision is made, in consultation with the family, to withdraw life support measures. This limitation of life sustaining treatments is never carried out with the aim of making a Maastricht iii donation, but to avoid prolonging the dying process through useless and possibly degrading interventions. The obligation of the health team is to provide a dignified death and this not only includes the absence of pain, but the patient and their family must be guaranteed a feeling of calmness and serenity. Once the decision has been taken to withhold or withdraw measures, the nurse has an important role in the implementation of a palliative care plan in where physicians, nurses and patients/families should be involved and whose focus should be on patients' dignity and comfort, considering their physical, psychological and spiritual needs.

Recommendations of the Working Groups from the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) for the management of adult critically ill patients

The standardization of the Intensive Care Medicine may improve the management of the adult critically ill patient. However, these strategies have not been widely applied in the Intensive Care Units (ICUs). The aim is to elaborate the recommendations for the standardization of the treatment of critical patients. A panel of experts from the thirteen working groups (WG) of the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) was selected and nominated by virtue of clinical expertise and/or scientific experience to carry out the recommendations. Available scientific literature in the management of adult critically ill patients from 2002 to 2016 was extracted. The clinical evidence was discussed and summarised by the experts in the course of a consensus finding of every WG and finally approved by the WGs after an extensive internal review process that was carried out between December 2015 and December 2016. A total of 65 recommendations were developed, of which 5 corresponded to each of the 13 WGs. These recommendations are based on the opinion of experts and scientific knowledge, and are intended as a guide for the intensivists in the management of critical patients.

Intensive care medicine and organ donation: exploring the last frontiers?

The main, universal problem for transplantation is organ scarcity. The gap between offer and demand grows wider every year and causes many patients in waiting list to die. In Spain, 90% of transplants are done with organs taken from patients deceased in brain death but this has a limited potential. In order to diminish organ shortage, alternative strategies such as donations from living donors, expanded criteria donors or donation after circulatory death, have been developed. Nevertheless, these types of donors also have their limitations and so are not able to satisfy current organ demand. It is necessary to reduce family denial and to raise donation in brain death thus generalizing, among other strategies, non-therapeutic elective ventilation. As intensive care doctors, cornerstone to the national donation programme, we must consolidate our commitment with society and organ transplantation. We must contribute with the values proper to our specialization and try to reach self-sufficiency by rising organ obtainment.