Pediatric priority in kidney allocation: challenging its acceptability

Addressing the Ethical Challenges of Providing Kidney Failure Care for Children: A Global Stance

Children with kidney failure require kidney replacement therapy (KRT), namely maintenance dialysis and kidney transplant. Adequate kidney failure care consists of KRT or conservative treatment with palliative care. In the context of kidney failure, children depend on parents who are their surrogate decision-makers, and the pediatric nephrology team for taking decisions about KRT or conservative care. In this paper, we discuss the ethical challenges that arise relating to such decision-making, from a global perspective, using the framework of pediatric bioethics. While many ethical dilemmas in the care of children with KRT are universal, the most significant ethical dilemma is the inequitable access to KRT in low & middle income countries (LMICs) where rates of morbidity and mortality depend on the family's ability to pay. Children with kidney failure in LMICs have inadequate access to maintenance dialysis, timely kidney transplant and palliative care compared to their counterparts in high income countries. Using case vignettes, we highlight how these disparities place severe burdens on caregivers, resulting in difficult decision-making, and lead to moral distress among pediatric nephrologists. We conclude with key action points to change this status-quo, the most important being advocacy by the global pediatric nephrology community for better access to affordable kidney failure care for children.

Ethical considerations in pediatric solid organ transplantation

Solid organ transplantation is now an accepted therapeutic modality for children and teenagers suffering from a wide variety of complex medical conditions. Unfortunately, patients continue to die while on the organ waiting list as there remains an imbalance between the number of recipients listed for transplantation and the number of donors available. The organ allocation process continues to generate ethical questions and debates. In this publication, we discuss some of the most frequently reported ethical matters in the field of pediatric solid organ transplantation.

Paediatric deceased donor kidney transplant in Australia: A 30-year review-What have paediatric bonuses achieved and where to from here?

BACKGROUND

In this 30-year national review, we describe trends in DD transplantation for paediatric recipients, assess the impact of paediatric allocation bonuses and identify outstanding areas of need for this population.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all DD kidney only transplants to paediatric recipients (<18 years old) in Australia between 1989 and 2018 was conducted using deidentified extracts from the ANZDATA.

RESULTS

Of the 1011 kidney only transplants performed in paediatric recipients during the study period, 426 (42%) were from deceased donors. Paediatric candidates on the DD waiting list had consistently higher rates of transplantation and shorter time from dialysis initiation to transplantation compared with adult candidates (median 372 vs 832 days in 2018, for example). Donor characteristics remained more favourable for paediatric recipients, despite a decline in the overall quality of the donor pool. The mean number of HLA antigen mismatches for paediatric recipients of DD transplants increased each decade (2.86 [1989-1998], 3.85 [1999-2008], 4.01 [2009-2018]). Both patient and graft survival have improved for paediatric DD transplant recipients in the most recent era (5-year graft and patient survival 85% vs 65% and 99% vs 94%, respectively, for 2009-2018 vs 1999-2008).

CONCLUSIONS

The current DD kidney allocation system in Australia provides rapid access to high-quality organs for paediatric recipients, and early graft loss has decreased significantly in recent years; however, additional targeted interventions to address HLA matching may improve long-term outcomes in this population.

The ethical debate over child priority in post-mortem organ allocation: A scoping review and practical-ethical outlook

BACKGROUND

Organ allocation guidelines in many countries give children relative priority, but the normative justification of child priority is seldom articulated.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a scoping review of the recent international literature (2013-2019) to identify moral positions and normative frameworks to justify or criticize pediatric priority in all kind of organ allocation. We identified 11 relevant papers.

RESULTS

Our analysis revealed a complex juxtaposition of pro and contra argumentations along three main normative lines: a) equal treatment of each individual, b) individual benefit, and c) social benefit and the public good. The general type of argument can be found independent of the organ allocated. For each of these three lines we identified and categorized two types of argumentations: those in favor and those critical of the priority rule. Additionally, we discuss a problematic issue that has not yet been mentioned in the literature, namely the effects of age thresholds related to child-priority rules in organ allocation. We illustrate this problem with an analysis of selected German data with allocated postmortal kidneys and livers. These data show non-normal distributions of organ transplantations and waiting times for patients between the ages of 16 and 19.

DISCUSSION

Our overview serves as a matrix to reconsider existing guideline policy. The review can assist policy makers or experts on organ allocation committees in increasing the transparency of child priority rules, in explaining their justifications, and in reforming existing guidelines.

Is there an ethical obligation to split every donor liver? Scarce resources, medical factors, and ethical reasoning

SLT has the potential to counter the worldwide shortage of donor organs. Although the preferred recipients of SLT are usually pediatric patients, a more stringent ethical argument than the fundamental prioritization of children is to demonstrate that SLT of deceased donor organs could increase access to this potentially lifesaving resource for all patients, including children. Several empirical studies show that SLT also makes it possible to achieve similar outcomes to WLT in adults if several factors are observed. In general, it can be regarded as ethically permissible to insist on splitting a donor liver if, in an individual case, SLT is expected to have a similar outcome to that of WLT. The question is therefore no longer whether, but under what conditions SLT is able to achieve similar results to WLT. One of the main challenges of the current debate is the restricted comparability of the available data. We therefore have an ethical obligation to improve the available empirical data by implementing prospective clinical studies, SLT programs, and national registries. The introduction of 2 modes of allocation-one for patients willing to accept both SLT and WLT, and a second for patients only willing to accept WLT-would help to resolve the issue of patient autonomy in the case of mandatory splitting policy.

Should Children Be Given Priority in Kidney Allocation?

Kidneys for transplantation are scarce, and many countries give priority to children in allocating them. This paper explains and criticizes the paediatric priority. We set out the relevant ethical principles of allocation, such as utility and severity, and the relevant facts to do with such matters as sensitization and child development. We argue that the facts and principles do not support and sometimes conflict with the priority given to children. We next consider various views on how age or the status of children should affect allocation. Again, these views do not support priority to children in its current form. Since distinctions based on age ought to be positively justified, the failure of all these attempts at justification implies that the priority to children is ethically mistaken. Finally, the paper points to evidence that the paediatric priority reduces the overall supply of kidneys, at least in the United States. Paediatric priority is a real-world policy that seems discriminatory, in some places probably reduces the supply of organs, has no robust official defence, and is unsupported by mainstream ethical principles. Consequently, it should be ended.

Balancing competing needs in kidney transplantation: does an allocation system prioritizing children affect the renal transplant function?

Children often merit priority in access to deceased donor kidneys by organ-sharing organizations. We report the impact of the new Swiss Organ Allocation System (SOAS) introduced in 2007, offering all kidney allografts from deceased donors <60 years preferentially to children. The retrospective cohort study included all paediatric transplant patients (<20 years of age) before (n = 19) and after (n = 32) the new SOAS (from 2001 to 2014). Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), urine protein-to-creatinine ratio (UPC), need for antihypertensive medication, waiting times to kidney transplantation (KTX), number of pre-emptive transplantations and rejections, and the proportion of living donor transplants were considered as outcome parameters. Patients after the new SOAS had significantly better eGFRs 2 years after KTX (Mean Difference, MD = 25.7 ml/min/1.73 m² , P = 0.025), lower UPC ratios (Median Difference, MeD = -14.5 g/mol, P = 0.004), decreased waiting times to KTX (MeD = -97 days, P = 0.021) and a higher proportion of pre-emptive transplantations (Odds Ratio = 9.4, 95% CI = 1.1-80.3, P = 0.018), while the need for antihypertensive medication, number of rejections and living donor transplantations remained stable. The new SOAS is associated with improved short-term clinical outcomes and more rapid access to KTX. Despite lacking long-term research, the study results should encourage other policy makers to adopt the SOAS approach.