The case for kidney donation before end-of-life care

The Extent to Which the Wish to Donate One's Organs After Death Contributes to Life-Extension Arguments in Favour of Voluntary Active Euthanasia in the Terminally Ill: An Ethical Analysis

In terminally ill individuals who would otherwise end their own lives, active voluntary euthanasia (AVE) can be seen as life-extending rather than life-shortening. Accordingly, AVE supports key pro-euthanasia arguments (appeals to autonomy and beneficence) and meets certain sanctity of life objections. This paper examines the extent to which a terminally ill individual's wish to donate organs after death contributes to those life-extension arguments. It finds that, in a terminally ill individual who wishes to avoid experiencing life he considers to be not worth living, and who also wishes to donate organs after death, AVE maximizes the likelihood that such donations will occur. The paper finds that the wish to donate organs strengthens the appeals to autonomy and beneficence, and fortifies the meeting of certain sanctity of life objections, achieved by life-extension arguments, and also generates appeals to justice that form novel life-extension arguments in favour of AVE in this context.

Does Controlled Donation after Circulatory Death Violate the Dead Donor Rule?

The vital status of patients who are a part of controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) is widely debated in bioethical literature. Opponents to currently applied cDCD protocols argue that they violate the dead donor rule, while proponents of the protocols advocate compatibility. In this article, we argue that both parties often misinterpret the moral implications of the dead donor rule. The rule as such does not require an assessment of a donor's vital status, we contend, but rather an assessment of whether procurement of organs in cDCD cause the death of the donor or not. We then argue that commonly practiced cDCD protocols do not violate the dead donor rule, since the donation does not trigger or cause the death of the donors.

Survey of public attitudes towards imminent death donation in the United States

Imminent death donation (IDD) is described as living organ donation prior to a planned withdrawal of life-sustaining care in an imminently dying patient. Although IDD was ethically justified by United Network for Organ Sharing, the concept remains controversial due to presumed lack of public support. The aim of this study was to evaluate the public's attitudes towards IDD. A cross-sectional survey was conducted of US adults age >18 years (n = 2644). The survey included a case scenario of a patient with a devastating brain injury. Responses were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale. Results showed that 68% - 74% of participants agreed or strongly agreed with IDD when posed as a general question and in relation to the case scenario. Participants were concerned about "recovery after a devastating brain injury" (34%), and that "doctors would not try as hard to save a patient's life" (33%). Only 9% of participants would be less likely to trust the organ donation process. In conclusion, our study demonstrates strong public support for IDD in the case of a patient with a devastating brain injury. Notably, participants were not largely concerned with losing trust in the organ donation process. These results justify policy change towards imminent death donation.

Living Donation by Individuals with Life-Limiting Conditions

The traditional living donor was very healthy. However, as the supply-demand gap continues to expand, transplant programs have become more accepting of less healthy donors. This paper focuses on the other extreme, asking whether and when individuals who have life-limiting conditions (LLC) should be considered for living organ donation. We discuss ethical issues raised by 1) donation by individuals with progressive severe debilitating disease for whom there is no ameliorative therapy; and 2) donation by individuals who are imminently dying or would die by the donation process itself.

Potential yield of imminent death kidney donation

About 99 000 people are waiting for a kidney in the United States, and many will die waiting. The concept of "imminent death" donation, a type of living donation, has been gaining attention among physicians, patients, and ethicists. We estimated the number of potential imminent death kidney donors at the University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics by assessing the number of annual deaths in individuals with normal kidney function. Based on a previous survey suggesting that one-third of patients might be willing to donate at imminent death, we estimate that between 76 and 396 people in the state of Wisconsin would be medically eligible and willing to donate each year at the time of imminent death. We extrapolated these numbers to all transplant centers in the United States, estimating that between 5925 and 31 097 people might be eligible and willing to donate each year. Our results suggest that allowing donation at imminent death and including discussions about organ donation in end-of-life planning could substantially reduce the nation's kidney waiting list while providing many more donors the opportunity to give this gift.

Outcomes of organ transplants when the donor is a prior recipient

Organ shortage continues to challenge the field of transplantation. One potential group of donors are those who have been transplant recipients themselves, or Organ Donation After Transplant (ODAT) donors. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to describe ODAT donors and to compare outcomes of ODAT grafts versus conventional grafts. From October 1, 1987 to June 30, 2015, 517 former recipients successfully donated 803 organs for transplant. Former kidney recipients generally survived a median of approximately 4 years before becoming an ODAT donor whereas liver, lung, and heart recipients generally survived less than a month prior to donation. In the period June 1, 2005 to December 31, 2014, liver grafts from ODAT donors had a significantly higher risk of graft failure compared to non-ODAT liver transplants (P = .008). Kidney grafts donated by ODAT donors whose initial transplant occurred >1 year prior were associated with significantly increased graft failure (P = .012). Despite increased risk of graft failure amongst certain ODAT grafts, 5-year survival was still high. ODAT donors should be considered another form of expanded criteria donor under these circumstances.

Organ donation protocols

Organ transplantation improves survival and quality of life in patients with end-organ failure. Waiting lists continue to grow across the world despite remarkable advances in the transplantation process, from the creation of public engagement campaigns to the development of critical pathways for the timely identification, referral, approach, and treatment of the potential organ donor. The pathophysiology of dying triggers systemic changes that are intimately related to organ viability. The intensive care management of the potential organ donor optimizes organ function and improves the donation yield, representing a significant step in reducing the mismatch between organ supply and demand. Different beliefs and cultures reflect diverse legislations and donation practices amongst different countries, creating a challenge to standardized practices. Maintaining public trust is necessary for continued progress in organ donation and transplantation, hence the urge for a joint effort in creating uniform protocols that ensure transparent practices within the medical community.

The case against imminent death donation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Imminent death donation (IDD) is a proposal to procure organs from patients prior to the withdrawal of life support, which is anticipated to lead to death. In this review, we outline substantial concerns that the transplant community should consider when deliberating the possibility of practicing IDD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although there are several compelling theoretical and intuitive reasons to support IDD, its application has been hindered because of inadequate definitions or protocols. A lack of published reports limits empirical data about the practice. Discussion on the topic has not adequately addressed potential harms to the donor, involvement of stakeholders, or the threat to public trust.

SUMMARY

Although IDD has been proposed as a method to increase the number of organs or improve end-of-life care, the proposal currently poses more risk than benefit for patients and the transplant community. Until the major barriers to implementation of IDD are addressed, the transplant community should invest its efforts to increase the organ supply elsewhere.

Organ donation and imminent death: pro position

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Donation after cardiac death is associated with many problems including ischemic injury, high rates of delayed allograft function, prolonged time to asystole, and frequent organ discard. Imminent death donation (IDD) has been proposed as a separate category of organ donation: distinct from living donation and donation after cardiac death.

RECENT FINDINGS

A protocol for IDD was developed at Rhode Island Hospital and published in the ethics literature. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Ethics Committee reviewed the protocol and stated that IDD was ethically appropriate in some cases. A wider review by a working group within UNOS concluded similarly, but felt that a myriad of policy revisions would be required and were concerned about a possible negative impact on public trust in organ donation. Nonetheless, IDD and other nontraditional strategies continue to be proposed, implemented in other countries and discussed by patients and donor families.

SUMMARY

This review, on the 'Pro' side of IDD, proposes that the medical community continue to work toward implementing IDD. Donor family's wishes are best met by organ donation, successful outcomes for the recipients, and a dignified death for their loved one. In some cases, IDD is the best strategy to meet these goals.

The 1966 Ciba Symposium on Transplantation Ethics: 50 Years Later

In March 1966, the Ciba Foundation sponsored the first international, interdisciplinary symposium focused on ethical and legal issues in transplantation. The attendees included not only physicians and surgeons but also judges and legal scholars, a minister, and a science journalist. In this article, we will consider some of the topics in organ transplantation that were discussed by the attendees, what we have learned in the intervening half century, and the relevance of their discussions today. Specifically, we examine the definition of death and its implications for organ procurement, whether it is ethical and legal to "maim" a living individual for the benefit of another, how to ensure that the consent of the living donor is voluntary and informed, the case of identical twins, the question of whether ethically minors can serve as living donors, the health risks of living donation, the ethics and legality of an organ market, and the economic barriers to living donation. We show that many of the concerns discussed at the Ciba symposium remain highly relevant, and their discussions have helped to shape the ethical boundaries of organ transplantation today.

Donation after circulatory death: current practices, ongoing challenges, and potential improvements

Organ donation after circulatory death (DCD) has been endorsed by the World Health Organization and is practiced worldwide. This overview examines current DCD practices, identifies problems and challenges, and suggests clinical strategies for possible improvement. Although there is uniform agreement on DCD donor candidacy (ventilator-dependent individuals with nonrecoverable or irreversible neurologic injury not meeting brain death criteria), there are variations in all aspects of DCD practice. Utilization of DCD organs is limited by hypoxia, hypotension, reduced--then absent--organ perfusion, and ischemia/reperfusion syndrome. Nevertheless, DCD kidneys exhibit comparable function and survival to donors with brain death kidneys, although they have higher rates of primary graft nonfunction, delayed graft function, discard, and retrieval associated injury. Concern over ischemic organ injury underscores the reluctance to recover extrarenal DCD organs since lack of medical therapy to support inadequate allograft function limits their acceptability. Nevertheless, limited results with DCD pancreas, liver, and lung allografts (but not heart) are now approaching that of donors with brain death organs. Pretransplant machine perfusion of DCD kidneys (vs. static storage) may reduce delayed graft function but has no effect on long-term organ function and survival. Normothermic regional perfusion used during DCD abdominal organ retrieval may reduce ischemic organ injury and increase the number of usable organs, although critical confirmative studies have yet to be done. Minor increases in usable DCD kidneys could accrue from increased use of pediatric DCD kidneys and from selective use of DCD/ECD kidneys, whereas a modest increase could result through utilization of donors declared dead beyond 1 hr from withdrawal of life support therapy. A significant increase in transplantable kidneys could be achieved by extension of the concept of living kidney donation in relation to imminent death of potential DCD donors. Progress in research to identify, prevent, and repair DCD-associated organ retrieval injury should improve utilization of DCD organs. Recent results using ex situ pretransplant organ perfusion of DCD organs has been encouraging in this regard.