Search

Purpose of Review: With the advent of direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, the use of organs from hepatitis C virus infected (HCV+) donors is gaining more traction. In this review, we aim to: provide an overview of recent literature that supports the use of HCV+ organs, outline ongoing challenges to the use of these organs, and highlight the areas within this field where active investigation is ongoing., Recent Findings: The present review describes clinical outcomes related to the transplantation of both HCV+ nonviremic and viremic organs and the distinction between hepatic and nonhepatic transplants. It also discusses the current debate pertaining to the ideal treatment strategy for donor-derived HCV infection, that is pre-emptive therapy versus prophylaxis therapy., Summary: Data suggest that the use of HCV+ organs is an effective and relatively well tolerated strategy to combat the organ scarcity. However, clinicians must be vigilant to a signal of increased inflammation as HCV+ organ transplantation becomes more universal. Recent studies suggest that shorter courses of DAA may sufficiently treat donor-derived HCV infection, however the best treatment approach to minimize risk, cost, and toxicity is still under investigation.

Donor-derived human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmissions in transplantation have led to policies mandating assessment of donor behavioral history, and disclosure of donor increased risk (IR) status to recipients. Organ Procurement Transplantation Network (OPTN) policy safeguards were promulgated in the context of deceased donation, with its narrow time window for organ utilization and uncertainty about donor history. These policies have been applied to living donation without substantive data on risk of disease transmission in living donor transplantation. Unlike for deceased donors, the OPTN does not collect data on living donor IR status. Given the feasibility of thorough living donor evaluation via already-mandated lab tests and clinical assessments, living donor IR assessment and associated disclosures may have limited benefit in improving recipient informed consent. Applying the current IR policy to living donors may also introduce unintended consequences to donors and recipients, causing donors psychological harm, delays in donation to avoid IR status disclosure, and potential withdrawal from donation. We suggest strategies that reduce risk of harm to donor candidates while maintaining policy compliance, and review additional approaches for evaluating risk of disease transmission in living donor candidates. Data on the risk of disease transmission by living donors are needed to inform policy modification., (© 2019 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the sociodemographic characteristics of people who applied to be kidney donors at an organ transplantation center., Material and Methods: A total of 728 participants in the kidney donor program were included in the study between 2015 and 2018 at Istanbul Yeniyüzyıl University Gaziosmanpaşa Hospital. The sociodemographic data of the participants were retrospectively analyzed through computer records, and data were analyzed., Results: Two hundred thirty-nine men and 489 women were included into the study. Six hundred ten were live donors, and 118 were cadaveric donors. Of the donors included in the study, 24.9% were illiterate, 52.1% were primary school graduates, 17.3% were high school graduates, and 5.7% were university graduates. Of the living donors, 156 (25.5%) were spouses, 91 (14.9%) were mothers, 72 (11.9%) were siblings, 65 (10.5%) were fathers, 64 (10.7%) were children, 46 were (7.5%) were other relatives, and 116 (19.0%) were nonrelatives., Conclusions: In recent years, the number of live kidney transplantations has increased. Therefore, it is necessary to protect their well-being by using evidence-based donor evaluation and treatment strategies to prevent and treat negative consequences of donations., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: As transplant centers start leveraging Twitter for information dissemination and public engagement, it is important to understand current living solid organ donation-related Twitter use., Methods: We identified public Twitter profiles available in 01/2017 that referenced living organ donation and analyzed the use of donation-related Twitter handles, names, or profile information. Tweets were manually abstracted and qualitatively analyzed for common themes. Social media influence of those tweeting about living donation was evaluated using Klout score., Results: We identified 93 donors, 61 professionals, 12 hospitals, and 19 organizations that met eligibility criteria. Social media influence was similar across these groups (P = 0.4). Donors (16%) and organizations (23%) were more likely than professionals (7%) or hospitals (0%) to include transplant-related educational information in their profiles (P = 0.007). Living donation-related tweets were most commonly donation stories (33%), news reports (20%), reports about new transplant research (15%), and sharing transplant candidates' searches for donors (14%)., Conclusions: This exploratory study of living donors and transplant professionals, hospitals, and organizations on Twitter provides insight into how the social media platform may be used to communicate about and disseminate information about living donation., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: In the past decades, short-term results after solid organ transplantation have markedly improved. Disappointingly, this has not been accompanied by parallel improvements in long-term outcomes after transplantation. To improve graft and recipient outcomes, identification of potentially modifiable risk factors and development of biomarkers are required. We provide the rationale and design of a large prospective cohort study of solid organ transplant recipients (TransplantLines)., Methods and Analysis: TransplantLines is designed as a single-centre, prospective cohort study and biobank including all different types of solid organ transplant recipients as well as living organ donors. Data will be collected from transplant candidates before transplantation, during transplantation, at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years, and subsequently every 5 years after transplantation. Data from living organ donors will be collected before donation, during donation, at 3 months, 1 year and 5 years after donation, and subsequently every 5 years. The primary outcomes are mortality and graft failure. The secondary outcomes will be cause-specific mortality, cause-specific graft failure and rejection. The tertiary outcomes will be other health problems, including diabetes, obesity, hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia and cardiovascular disease, and disturbances that relate to quality of life, that is, physical and psychological functioning, including quality of sleep, and neurological problems such as tremor and polyneuropathy., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained from the relevant local ethics committee. The TransplantLines cohort study is designed to deliver pioneering insights into transplantation and donation outcomes. The study design allows comprehensive data collection on perioperative care, nutrition, social and psychological functioning, and biochemical parameters. This may provide a rationale for future intervention strategies to more individualised, patient-centred transplant care and individualisation of treatment., Trial Registration Number: NCT03272841., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Transplantation of organs from living donors helps to decrease the organ shortage and shortens waiting times. Living donor (LD) transplantation is also generally associated with better outcomes. Unfortunately, there has been no comprehensive analysis and comparison of all types of solid-organ transplantation from living donors since the inception of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)., Methods: Using the UNOS/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database, all LD transplants from October 1, 1987, to December 31, 2015, were studied with univariate and multivariate analyses., Results: A total of 140,090 organs were transplanted from LDs, accounting for 21% of all transplants in the United States. Over 95% were kidney; 4% were liver; and <1% intestine, lung, and pancreas LDs. Only LD kidney transplant patient and graft survival rates were significantly higher compared deceased donor transplants over the period of analysis. The best long-term LD transplant results were achieved in pediatric liver recipients. Significantly more women than men donated organs and significantly more men than women received solid-organ transplants. A regional disparity was observed for LD kidney as well as for LD liver transplants. Despite improvements in outcomes and increased use of nonbiologic donors, the number of LD transplants in the United States has declined. This decline was greater in children than adults and was noted for all types of organ transplants., Conclusion: Further efforts are needed to educate the public, health professionals, and transplant candidates on the advantages of living vs deceased donor organ transplantation. Compared with other countries, LD transplantation has yet to reach its full potential in the United States., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Evolving methods of communication have increased public appeals for living organ and hematopoietic stem cell donations from strangers, giving public solicitations more visibility. Within the academic literature, perspectives have been divisive, reflecting ethical justifications for and against appeals for living unrelated donors. Transplant programs and clinicians face a variety of ethical dilemmas when patients and their solicited donors present to the hospital., Objective: A scoping review methodology was designed to (1) explore the academic literature and (2) summarize and disseminate key research findings., Methods: We used the Arksey & O'Malley framework for conducting and reporting scoping reviews and to review the prominent ethical arguments, counterarguments, and policy implications in the literature. From 4616 articles identified through MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and CINAHL, we screened titles and abstracts to assess eligibility for full-text review., Results: We retrieved 280 full texts, extracted data from 61, and coded and analyzed 41 papers. Of these, 36 were from or based in the US context. Two articles originated from Canada. Three articles addressed public solicitations of hematopoietic stem cell donation. We mapped themes under 3 major headings related to public solicitations of living unrelated donors for organs and hematopoietic stem cells: (1) interpretations and modes, (2) ethical arguments for and against, and (3) policy implications and suggestions to address challenges for clinical practice., Discussion: The academic literature contains divisive perspectives of public solicitations for organ and hematopoietic stem cell donation, each of which deserves further reflection for implications for policy and practice.

Background: The donation of multiple allografts from a single living donor is a rare practice, and the patient characteristics and outcomes associated with these procedures are not well described., Methods: Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 101 living multiorgan donors and their 133 recipients., Results: The 49 sequential (donations during separate procedures) multiorgan donors provided grafts to 81 recipients: 21 kidney-then-liver, 15 liver-then-kidney, 5 lung-then-kidney, 3 liver-then-intestine, 3 kidney-then-pancreas, 1 lung-then-liver, and 1 pancreas-then-kidney. Of these donors, 38% donated 2 grafts to the same recipient and 15% donated 2 grafts as non-directed donors. Compared to recipients from first-time, single organ living donors, recipients from second-time living donors had similar graft and patient survival. The 52 simultaneous (multiple donations during one procedure) multiorgan donors provided 2 grafts to 1 recipient each: 48 kidney-pancreas and 4 liver-intestine. Donors had median of 13.4 years (interquartile range, 8.3-18.5 years) of follow-up. There was one reported death of a sequential donor (2.5 years after second donation). Few postdonation complications were reported over a median of 116 days (interquartile range, 0-295 days) of follow-up; however, routine living donor follow-up data were sparse. Recipients of kidneys from second-time living donors had similar graft (P = 0.2) and patient survival (P = 0.4) when compared with recipients from first-time living donors. Similarly, recipients of livers from second-time living donors had similar graft survival (P = 0.9) and patient survival (P = 0.7) when compared with recipients from first-time living donors., Conclusions: Careful documentation of outcomes is needed to ensure ethical practices in selection, informed consent, and postdonation care of this unique donor community.

In the Maghreb, organ failure constitutes a major public health problem, especially given the increasing number of patients with chronic renal failure and the high cost of care. In this study, we attempted to seek the recommendations, through a questionnaire, of various officials related to organ transplantation as well as leaders of ethics committees and religious groups in different countries of the Maghreb. The objective was to improve the rate of organ donation and transplantation. We received 36 replies (62%) within the prescribed time limit. In our survey, 83% of the respondents felt that living donor transplantation should be promoted initially, followed gradually by measures to increase cadaver donor transplantation to achieve a target of about 30 transplants with cadaver kidney donors per million inhabitants. To expand the donor pool, 83% of the respondents proposed to expand the family circle to include the spouse and in laws. To improve the cadaver donation activity, one should improve the organizational aspects to ensure at least 50 renal transplantations per year (100%) and provide material motivation to the treatment team proportional to the activity of organ donation and transplantation. Finally, 93% of the respondents suggested suitable moral motivation of the donors.

Despite the Transplantation of Human Organ Act passed in Indian Parliament in 1994, cadaver liver and/or kidney transplant are infrequently performed (in a few private hospitals) in our country compared to living donor liver or kidney transplant. The need for performing more cadaver liver and/or kidney transplants in private and public hospitals is obvious. Immediate measures which should be taken to facilitate more cadaver organ transplant both in private and public hospitals are suggested. Organ donation is for an individual or a family an invaluable opportunity, to register victory after death.

Organ transplantation remains the only life-saving therapy for many patients with organ failure. Despite the work of the Organ Donation and Transplant Collaboratives, and the marked increases in deceased donors early in the effort, deceased donors only rose by 67 from 2006 and the number of living donors declined during the same time period. There continue to be increases in the use of organs from donors after cardiac death (DCD) and expanded criteria donors (ECD). This year has seen a major change in the way organs are offered with increased patient safety measures in those organ offers made by OPOs using DonorNet. Unfortunately, the goals of 75% conversion rates, 3.75 organs transplanted per donor, 10% of all donors from DCD sources and 20% growth of transplant center volume have yet to be reached across all donation service areas (DSAs) and transplant centers; however, there are DSAs that have not only met, but exceeded, these goals. Changes in organ preservation techniques took place this year, partly due to expanding organ acceptance criteria and increasing numbers of ECDs and DCDs. Finally, the national transplant environment has changed in response to increased regulatory oversight and new requirements for donation and transplant provider organizations.

Intensive care unit teams are a critical part of the solid organ transplant process. The psychosocial issues involved during critical periods of transplantation are important for intensive care physicians and clinicians to understand to provide comprehensive care to transplant patients. This article provides a brief overview of transplant epidemiology, followed by a review of the psychosocial issues relevant to the phases of the transplant process. Considered are the pretransplant evaluation phase, psychiatric disorders in transplant patients, and cognitive impairments and delirium with additional issues specific to particular organs. Also covered are the side effects of immunosuppressive medications and special issues arising with living donors.

The demand for organ transplantation has rapidly increased all over the world during the past decade due to the increased incidence of vital organ failure, the rising success and greater improvement in posttransplant outcome. However, the unavailability of adequate organs for transplantation to meet the existing demand has resulted in major organ shortage crises. As a result there has been a major increase in the number of patients on transplant waiting lists as well as in the number of patients dying while on the waiting list. In the United States, for example, the number of patients on the waiting list in the year 2006 had risen to over 95,000, while the number of patient deaths was over 6,300. This organ shortage crisis has deprived thousands of patients of a new and better quality of life and has caused a substantial increase in the cost of alternative medical care such as dialysis. There are several procedures and pathways which have been shown to provide practical and effective solutions to this crisis. These include implementation of appropriate educational programs for the public and hospital staff regarding the need and benefits of organ donation, the appropriate utilization of marginal (extended criteria donors), acceptance of paired organ donation, the acceptance of the concept of "presumed consent," implementation of a system of "rewarded gifting" for the family of the diseased donor and also for the living donor, developing an altruistic system of donation from a living donor to an unknown recipient, and accepting the concept of a controlled system of financial payment for the donor. As is outlined in this presentation, we strongly believe that the implementation of these pathways for obtaining organs from the living and the dead donors, with appropriate consideration of the ethical, religious and social criteria of the society, the organ shortage crisis will be eliminated and many lives will be saved through the process of organ donation and transplantation.

This study analyzed the effect of population aging on organ donation for transplants in 43 countries and on the effectiveness of the donation process by comparing the results between Spain and the United States. The percentage of the population aged 65 or over accounted for 33% of the difference in the donation rates between the countries and for 91% of the variation in the rates after age adjustment. However, the level of aging of the Spanish (16.5%) and American (12.3%) populations failed to account for the percentages of deceased donors 65 or over (28% vs. 10%), due to the different age-specific donation rates, much higher in Spain above 50 years. These differences lead to a higher effectiveness of the process in the United States (3.1 transplanted organs per donor vs. 2.5 in Spain), though at lower rates of transplant per million population (73 vs. 87). We conclude that older populations have a greater donation potential as donation rates are strongly associated with population aging. It should therefore be mandatory to adjust donation rates for age before making comparisons. Additionally, effectiveness decreases with older donors, so age should be considered when establishing standards relating to organ donation and effectiveness of the process.

Continued progress in organ donation will help enable transplantation to alleviate the increasing incidence of end-stage organ disease. This article discusses the implementation and effect of the federally initiated Organ Donation Breakthrough Collaborative; it then reviews organ donation data, living and deceased, from 1995 to 2004. It is the first annual report of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to include national data following initiation of the collaborative in 2003. Prior to that, annual growth in deceased donation was 2%-4%; in 2004, after initiation of the collaborative, deceased donation increased 11%. Identification and dissemination of best practices for organ donation have emphasized new strategies for improved consent, including revised approaches to minority participation, timing of requests and team design. The number of organs recovered from donation after cardiac death (DCD) grew from 64 in 1995 to 391 in 2004. While efforts are ongoing to develop methodologies for identifying expanded criteria donors (ECD) for organs other than kidney, it is clear DCD and ECD raise questions regarding cost and recovery. The number of living donor organs increased from 3493 in 1995 to 7002 in 2004; data show trends toward more living unrelated donors and those providing non-directed donations.

Purpose: To determine how sociodemographic characteristics influence both access to transplantation and organ donation., Methods: For all transplants in the United States from 1996 to 2001, donor-recipient pairs were categorized as white-white, white-black, black-white, or black-black. The difference in the percentage of white-black versus black-white pairs was calculated as a measure of the net transfer of organs from one racial group to another. A similar approach was used to examine the net transfer of organs across other sociodemographic categories., Results: Among cadaveric renal transplants, 66% of donor-recipient pairs were white-white, 23% were white-black, 5% were black-white, and 6% were black-black. Thus, there was an 18% net transfer of organs from white donors to black recipients (23% minus 5%). Among living donor transplants involving spouses, there was a 36% net transfer from wives to husbands. Among all cadaveric transplants, there was a 36% to 68% net transfer from younger donors to older recipients. Among cadaveric nonrenal transplants, there was a 7% to 18% net transfer from lower-income donors to higher-income recipients., Conclusion: The sociodemographic characteristics of persons who donate organs and those who benefit from organ transplantation differ markedly. Efforts to improve access and increase donation should address these differences.

The number of organ transplants performed in Asian countries during 2001 and 2002 are reported along with the present status of dialysis patients. Questionnaires were sent to key persons of each country where transplantation currently takes place. The total number of organ transplants is gradually decreasing, particularly those using cadaveric donors, while liver and lung transplantation using living donors are growing in Japan and Korea. Education and stimulation of the public is strongly requested to promote donation.

Objective: The aim of the study was to examine the opinion of Silesian Province citizens on living organ transplantation (Tx)., Methods: The materials in the study were the opinions of 1100 respondents selected from a representative group of adult citizens collected in 2002 using a public opinion poll. During the data collection a questionnaire interview was used, the result of which were subjected to a quantitative statistical analysis., Results: Of respondents, 83.1% do but 11.0% do not accept living organ Tx. 92.1% would give his organ for Tx to a relative, 80.5%--a friend and 54.3%--a strange person. The most common motives of potential agreement for living organ donation are awareness of helping another person (43.6%) or a relative (27.0%) as well as conviction of safety of organ harvesting procedure (10.0%). The most common motives of concern are fear of losing one's health (40.1%), poor state of health (13.8%) and fear of organ harvesting (9.8%)., Conclusions: Silesian Province citizens accept living organ Tx as a way of treatment of patients with end stage organ failure. The main motive of agreement for living organ donation is awareness of helping another person or a relative, and the most common motive of concern is fear of losing one's health.

Background: There is controversy whether laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN) is the procedure of choice for live kidney donors. The purpose of this survey therefore was to determine the current practices, attitudes, and plans regarding LDN in high-volume renal transplant centers., Methods: Medical directors of the 31 highest volume kidney transplant centers were surveyed via telephone. Kidney transplant data for 1998 and 1999 were collected., Results: The surveyed centers performed 5213 transplantations in 1998, representing 43% of all kidney transplantations done nationally. Twelve (39%) of the 31 centers performed LDN in 1998, increasing to 20 (65%) of 31 in 1999. Of 1174 live donor operations performed by the 20 centers in 1999, 365 (31%) were LDNs. Among the surveyed centers, four had no plans to begin an LDN program. The most commonly cited incentive for LDN was "shorter recovery time," whereas the most common disincentive was "concern about graft quality." A combination of observation and animate laboratory was the most commonly reported method of learning the LDN procedure. Six-month follow-up interviews found that 26 (84%) of 31 centers had performed LDN; only 1 of the 31 centers had no plans to perform LDNs., Conclusions: LDN may be the de facto procedure of choice for live donors within the next year. Efforts should now focus on improving techniques for performing and teaching this procedure.