Search

Objectives To analyse a potential association between surgical quality and time of day. Design A retrospective analysis of complete sets of quality forms filled out by the procuring and accepting surgeon on organs from deceased donors. Setting Procurement procedures in the Netherlands are organised per region. All procedures are performed by an independent, dedicated procurement team that is associated with an academic medical centre in the region. Participants In 18 months' time, 771 organs were accepted and procured in The Netherlands. Of these, 17 organs were declined before transport and therefore excluded. For the remaining 754 organs, 591 (78%) sets of forms were completed (procurement and transplantation). Baseline characteristics were comparable in both daytime and evening/night-time with the exception of height (p=0.003). Primary outcome measure All complete sets of quality forms were retrospectively analysed for the primary outcome, procurement-related surgical injury. Organs were categorised based on the starting time of the procurement in either daytime (8:00-17:00) or evening/night-time (17:00-8:00). Results Out of 591 procured organs, 129 organs (22%) were procured during daytime and 462 organs (78%) during evening/night-time. The incidence of surgical injury was significantly lower during daytime; 22 organs (17%) compared with 126 organs (27%) procured during evening/night-time (p=0.016). This association persists when adjusted for confounders. Conclusions This study shows an increased incidence of procurement-related surgical injury in evening/night-time procedures as compared with daytime. Time of day might (in)directly influence surgical performance and should be considered a potential risk factor for injury in organ procurement procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been considerable debate over regulated organ markets. Especially current markets, where people sell one of their kidneys while still alive, have received increased attention. Futures markets remain an interesting and under-discussed alternative specification of a market-based solution to the organ shortage. Futures markets pertain to the sale of the right to procure people's organs after they die. There is a wide range of possible specifications of the futures market. There are, however, some major unaddressed efficiency concerns. This article presents this class of concerns and discusses the implication for organ futures markets. It identifies a number of inefficiency sources pertaining to crowding out, bad organs, costs and missed opportunities, family refusals, moral hazard and strength of the provided incentive. However, a complete assessment of futures market requires better knowledge regarding the potential reaction from donors, families and health professionals., (© 2023. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Monash University.)

Families of organ donors play an important role in the deceased organ donation process. The aim of this study was to gain insight into donor family care by creating an inventory of practice in various European countries. A questionnaire about donor family care and contact between donor families and recipients was developed. Representatives of the organ donor professionals of 15 European countries responded (94%). The donor coordinator plays a key role in care for the donor family. All countries provide information about the donation results to the families, although diminished due to privacy laws. Anonymous written contact between donor families and recipients is possible in almost all countries and direct contact in only a few. Remembrance ceremonies exist in most countries. Half of the respondents thought the aftercare could improve. This first inventory shows that differences exist between countries, depending on the organisation of the donation process, the law and the different role of the professionals. Direct contact between donor families and recipients is rarely supported by the donation organisation. To date there has been limited research about the experience of donor family aftercare and we would urge all donation organisations to consider this as a priority area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I Transplant International i thanks the following colleagues for their time and effort in reviewing manuscripts during 2021. Their astute assessments along with their productive and often critical comments ensure that only high-quality papers are published in I Transplant International i . [Extracted from the article]

Summary: The access of non‐resident patients to the deceased donor waiting list (DDWL) poses different challenges. The European Committee on Organ Transplantation of the Council of Europe (CD‐P‐TO) has studied this phenomenon in the European setting. A questionnaire was circulated among the Council of Europe member states to inquire about the criteria applied for non‐residents to access their DDWL. Information was compiled from 28 countries. Less than 1% of recipients of deceased donor organs were non‐residents. Two countries never allow non‐residents to access the DDWL, four allow access without restrictions and 22 only under specific conditions. Of those, most give access to non‐resident patients already in their jurisdictions who are in a situation of vulnerability (urgent life‐threatening conditions). In addition, patients may be given access: (i) after assessment by a specific committee (four countries); (ii) within the framework of official cooperation agreements (15 countries); and (iii) after patients have officially lived in the country for a minimum length of time (eight countries). The ethical and legal implications of these policies are discussed. Countries should collect accurate information about residency status of waitlisted patients. Transparent criteria for the access of non‐residents to DDWL should be clearly defined at national level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deemed consent for organ donation has long been discussed as a potential solution to the shortage of organs for transplantation, with several countries having implemented it. In Great Britain, Wales was the first nation to introduce such a system, having done so in 2015. Now, the other two nations are following suit. In this paper, I compare the approaches of England and Scotland in moving to systems of deemed consent for organ donation. After outlining both sets of legislation, I focus on three points on which the two nations differ. First, the role of those close to the deceased in the consent process and the extent to which clinicians are required to consult them ahead of consent being deemed. Second, the role of government ministers in ensuring widespread public awareness. Third, the ways in which the two nations responded to the challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to the implementation of deemed consent. I conclude that on all three points, the Scottish approach is preferable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: This paper addresses ethical, legal, and psychosocial aspects of Global Kidney Exchange (GKE). Concerns have been raised that GKE violates the nonpayment principle, exploits donors in low‐ and middle‐income countries, and detracts from the aim of self‐sufficiency. We review the arguments for and against GKE. We argue that while some concerns about GKE are justified based on the available evidence, others are speculative and do not apply exclusively to GKE but to living donation more generally. We posit that concerns can be mitigated by implementing safeguards, by developing minimum quality criteria and by establishing an international committee that independently monitors and evaluates GKE's procedures and outcomes. Several questions remain however that warrant further clarification. What are the experiences and views of recipients and donors participating in GKE? Who manages the escrow funds that have been put in place for donor and recipients? What procedures and safeguards have been put in place to prevent corruption of these funds? What are the inclusion criteria for participating GKE centers? GKE provides opportunity to promote access to donation and transplantation but can only be conducted with the appropriate safeguards. Patients' and donors' voices are missing in this debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) has become an accepted practice in many countries and remains a focus of intense interest in the transplant community. The present study is aimed at providing a description of the current situation of DCD in European countries. Specific questionnaires were developed to compile information on DCD practices, activities and post‐transplant outcomes. Thirty‐five countries completed the survey. DCD is practiced in 18 countries: eight have both controlled DCD (cDCD) and uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) programs, 4 only cDCD and 6 only uDCD. All these countries have legally binding and/or nonbinding texts to regulate the practice of DCD. The no‐touch period ranges from 5 to 30 min. There are variations in ante and post mortem interventions used for the practice of cDCD. During 2008–2016, the highest DCD activity was described in the United Kingdom, Spain, Russia, the Netherlands, Belgium and France. Data on post‐transplant outcomes of patients who receive DCD donor kidneys show better results with grafts obtained from cDCD versus uDCD donors. In conclusion, DCD is becoming increasingly accepted and performed in Europe, importantly contributing to the number of organs available and providing acceptable post‐transplantation outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on to describe the technology with which patients and donors are matched in kidney exchange (KE) and to understand what drives the productivity of the platforms. The various KE platforms in the U.S. take different approaches to resolving the logistical issues. They studied the market using the empirical production function.

This report deals with organ retrieval procedures in both controlled and uncontrolled DCD, looking at the ethical, legal, and psychosocial aspects during the different phases of the process. A recently published report by the UK Donation Ethics Committee ( UKDEC) has served as an important reference document to outline the steps in the controlled DCD patient-donor pathway (Academy of Medical Royal Colleges. UK Donation Ethics Committee. An ethical framework for controlled donation after circulatory death. December 2011). For uncontrolled DCD, the UKDEC pathway description was adapted. At the 6th International Conference in Organ Donation held in Paris in 2013, an established expert European Working Group reviewed the UKDEC reports, which were then considered along with the available published literature. Along this pathway, the crucial ethical, legal, and psychosocial aspects have been flagged, and relevant recommendations have been formulated based on a consensus of the working group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents abstracts on organ transplantation including kidney transplantation of patients from deceased donors, use of Edinburgh Liver Function (ELF) score for identification of graft dysfunction after liver transplantation and graft failure after liver allograft dysfunction.