Timing of Organ Procurement From Brain-Dead Donors Associates With Short- and Long-Term Outcomes After Liver Transplantation

Better liver transplant outcomes by donor interventions?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Donor risk factors and events surrounding donation impact the quantity and quality of grafts generated to meet liver transplant waitlist demands. Donor interventions represent an opportunity to mitigate injury and risk factors within donors themselves. The purpose of this review is to describe issues to address among donation after brain death, donation after circulatory determination of death, and living donors directly, for the sake of optimizing relevant outcomes among donors and recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies on donor management practices and high-level evidence supporting specific interventions are scarce. Nonetheless, for donation after brain death (DBD), critical care principles are employed to correct cardiocirculatory compromise, impaired tissue oxygenation and perfusion, and neurohormonal deficits. As well, certain treatments as well as marginally prolonging duration of brain death among otherwise stable donors may help improve posttransplant outcomes. In donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD), interventions are performed to limit warm ischemia and reverse its adverse effects. Finally, dietary and exercise programs have improved donation outcomes for both standard as well as overweight living donor (LD) candidates, while minimally invasive surgical techniques may offer improved outcomes among LD themselves.

SUMMARY

Donor interventions represent means to improve liver transplant yield and outcomes of liver donors and grafts.

No Evidence of Progressive Proinflammatory Cytokine Storm in Brain-dead Organ Donors-A Time-course Analysis Using Clinical Samples

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplantation is a cost-effective treatment for end-stage organ failure. Organ donation after brain death is an important source of transplanted organs. Data are limited on the effects of brain injury or donor management on grafts. The consensus view has been that brain death creates a progressively proinflammatory environment. We aimed to investigate time-course changes across a range of cytokines in a donation after brain death cohort of donors who died of intracranial hemorrhage without any other systemic source of inflammation.

METHODS

A donor cohort was defined using the UK Quality in Organ Donation biobank. Serum levels of proteins involved in proinflammatory and brain injury pathways (tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-6, complement C5a, neuron-specific enolase, and glial fibrillary acidic protein) were measured from admission to organ recovery. Moving median analysis was used to combine donor trajectories and delineate a time-course.

RESULTS

A cohort of 27 donors with brain death duration between 10 and 30 h was created, with 24 donors contributing to the time-course analysis. We observed no increase in tumor necrosis factor-alpha or interleukin-6 throughout the donor management period. Neuronal injury marker and complement C5a remain high from admission to organ recovery, whereas glial fibrillary acidic protein rises around the confirmation of brain death.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence of a progressive rise of proinflammatory mediators with prolonged duration of brain death, questioning the hypothesis of a progressively proinflammatory environment. Furthermore, the proposed approach allows us to study chronological changes and identify biomarkers or target pathways when logistical or ethical considerations limit sample availability.

The decedent model: A new paradigm for de-risking high stakes clinical trials like xenotransplantation

The first 2 living recipients of pig hearts died unexpectedly within 2 months, despite both recipients receiving what over 30 years of nonhuman primate (NHP) research would suggest were the optimal gene edits and immunosuppression to ensure success. These results prompt us to question how faithfully data from the NHP model translate into human outcomes. Before attempting any further heart xenotransplants in living humans, it is highly advisable to gain a more comprehensive understanding of why the promising preclinical NHP data did not accurately predict outcomes in humans. It is also unlikely that additional NHP data will provide more information that would de-risk a xenoheart clinical trial because these cases were based on the best practices from the most successful NHP results to date. Although imperfect, the decedent model offers a complementary avenue to determine appropriate treatment regimens to control the human immune response to xenografts and better understand the biologic differences between humans and NHP that could lead to such starkly contrasting outcomes. Herein, we explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of the decedent model and contrast it to the advantages and disadvantages of the extensive body of data generated in the NHP xenoheart transplantation model.

Treating the dead; how far ought medicine go to obtain transplantable organs?

Under what circumstances, is it ethical to perform tumor surgery on a brain-dead individual? The neurosurgeons at Brigham and Women's Hospital were recently faced with such a question when asked to operate on a 28-year-old man who was pronounced brain-dead secondary to a severe brain-stem injury. His advanced directives clearly documented a desire for organ donation. During his transplant work-up, cranial imaging suggested a possible cerebellar mass of unknown etiology that was concerning for metastatic disease. Despite negative full body imaging, the neurosurgical team was asked to perform an open biopsy of the intracranial lesion to rule out occult systemic cancer. This case invites many nuanced questions related to the decisions surgeons and the broader medical community must make in the face of pursuing viable organs for the many in need. What is the moral standing and personhood eligibility of brain-dead individuals? What is the scope of medical interventions and procedures that surgeons are ethically bound to carry out? How ought the desire for increased medical intervention to try to save organs be balanced with practical limitations given limited medical resources?

Association of Procurement Time With Pancreas Transplant Outcomes in Brain-Dead Donors

A brain-death-induced cytokine storm damages organs in an organ donor. However, a longer time period between declaration of brain death and organ procurement (procurement interval) is associated with improved outcomes in kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplantation. The aim of this study was to find the optimal procurement interval for pancreas transplantation. Association of procurement interval with pancreas graft outcomes was analyzed using multivariable models adjusted for variables possibly affecting procurement interval and outcomes. Altogether 10,119 pancreas transplantations were included from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. The median follow-up was 3.2 (IQR 1.01-6.50) years. During the first year, 832 (9.0%) grafts were lost, including 555 (6.0%) within the first 30 days. Longer procurement interval was associated with increased death-censored graft survival in a multivariable model (HR 0.944 95% CI 0.917-0.972, per 10-h increase, p < 0.001). A decreasing hazard of graft loss was observed also with 1-year, but not with 30-day graft survival. During 1-year follow-up, 953 (12.1%) patients had an acute rejection, and longer procurement interval was also associated with less acute rejections (OR 0.937 95% CI 0.900-0.976, per 10-h increase, p = 0.002) in the multivariable model. In conclusion, longer procurement interval is associated with improved long-term outcomes in pancreas transplantation.