Systematic review on potential brain dead donor estimations and conversion rates to actually realized organ donations

A ten-year retrospective analysis of decompressive craniectomy or craniotomy after severe brain injury and its implications for donation after brain death

Craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy are among the therapeutic options to prevent or treat secondary damage after severe brain injury. The choice of procedure depends, among other things, on the type and severity of the initial injury. It remains controversial whether both procedures influence the neurological outcome differently. Thus, estimating the risk of brain herniation and death and consequently potential organ donation remains difficult. All patients at the University Hospital Münster for whom an isolated craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy was performed as a treatment after severe brain injury between 2013 and 2022 were retrospectively included. Proportion of survivors and deceased were evaluated. Deceased were further analyzed regarding anticoagulants, comorbidities, type of brain injury, potential and utilized donation after brain death. 595 patients were identified, 296 patients survived, and 299 deceased. Proportion of decompressive craniectomy was higher than craniotomy in survivors (89% vs. 11%, p < 0.001). Brain death was diagnosed in 12 deceased and 10 donations were utilized. Utilized donations were comparable after both procedures (5% vs. 2%, p = 0.194). Preserved brain stem reflexes as a reason against donation did not differ between decompressive craniectomy or craniotomy (32% vs. 29%, p = 0.470). Patients with severe brain injury were more likely to survive after decompressive craniectomy than craniotomy. Among the deceased, potential and utilized donations did not differ between both procedures. This suggests that brain death can occur independent of the previous neurosurgical procedure and that organ donation should always be considered in end-of-life decisions for patients with a fatal prognosis.

Facilitators and barriers in the donor family interview process from the perspective of hospital staff: a cross-sectional study

Background

Obtaining consent from potential donor families is a challenging step in the donation process and is influenced by various factors.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we utilized a questionnaire containing 14 questions about facilitators and barriers in the family interview process. The questionnaire was distributed in March 2023 to intensive care unit (ICU) nurses who had experience with donor family interviews. We collected the opinions of these respondents on hospital performance and drew comparisons between the studied hospitals.

Results

A total of 60 participating ICU nurses provided mean scores for hospital performance in family interviews of 2.60±0.84 for type I hospitals (those providing neurosurgery and trauma care) and 2.035±0.890 for type II hospitals (those without neurosurgery and trauma services; P=0.04). The mean scores for public and private hospitals were 1.86±0.86 and 2.59±0.85, respectively (P=0.008). Based on the findings, the most important facilitators were the availability of organ donation staff and access to a professional team for family discussions. Conversely, poor physician communication skills and limited communication capabilities among medical staff were identified as significant barriers. Implementation of a professional team for family interviews was found to be more critical for type II hospitals. Poor physician communication skills were a significant concern in public hospitals, while families' lack of awareness of patient prognosis emerged as a key barrier in private hospitals.

Conclusions

This study highlights numerous facilitators and barriers that vary across hospitals. Addressing these issues individually and developing tailored plans to enhance hospital performance in interviewing donor families is essential.

Paediatric organ donation following neurological determinants of death in intensive care units in Saudi Arabia: a retrospective cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this retrospective cross-sectional study was to assess the performance of paediatric organ donation in intensive care units following neurological determinants of death in Saudi Arabia.

DESIGN

Retrospective cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Paediatric intensive care units at three tertiary centres over 5 years.

PARTICIPANTS

423 paediatric deaths (<14 years) from January 2017 to December 2021.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Patients were identified as either possible, potential, eligible, approached, consented or actual donors based on organ donation definitions from the WHO, Transplantation Society and UK potential donor audit.

SECONDARY OUTCOME

Secondary outcome was causative mechanisms of brain injury in possible donors. Demographics of the study cohort (age, sex, hospital length of stay (LOS), paediatric intensive care unit LOS, pre-existing comorbidities, admission type and diagnosis category) were compared between possible and non-possible donors. Demographics were also compared between patients who underwent neurological determination of death and patients who did not.

RESULTS

Among the 423 paediatric deaths, 125 (29.6%) were identified as possible donors by neurological criteria (devastating brain insult with likelihood of brain death, Glasgow Coma Score of 3 and ≥2 absent brainstem reflexes). Of them, 41 (32.8%) patients were identified as potential donors (neurological determination of death examinations initiated by the treating team), while only two became actual donors. The eligible death conversion rate was 6.9%. The reporting rate to organ procurement organisation was 70.7% with a consent rate of 8.3%. The most common causes of brain insult causing death were cardiac arrest (44 of 125 patients, 35.2%), followed by traumatic brain injury and drowning (31 of 125 patients, 24.8%), and intracranial bleeding (13 of 125 patients, 11.4%).

CONCLUSION

Major contributors to low actual donation rate were consent, donor identification and donor referral.