Beatriz Domínguez-Gil

Current situation of donation after circulatory death in European countries

The aim of the present study was to describe the current situation of donation after circulatory death (DCD) in the Council of Europe, through a dedicated survey. Of 27 participating countries, only 10 confirmed any DCD activity, the highest one being described in Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (mainly controlled) and France and Spain (mainly uncontrolled). During 2000–2009, as DCD increased, donation after brain death (DBD) decreased about 20% in the three countries with a predominant controlled DCD activity, while DBD had increased in the majority of European countries. The number of organs recovered and transplanted per DCD increased along time, although it remained substantially lower compared with DBD. During 2000–2008, 5004 organs were transplanted from DCD (4261 kidneys, 505 livers, 157 lungs and 81 pancreas). Short‐term outcomes of 2343 kidney recipients from controlled versus 649 from uncontrolled DCD were analyzed: primary non function occurred in 5% vs. 6.4% (P = NS) and delayed graft function in 50.2% vs. 75.7% (P < 0.001). In spite of this, 1 year graft survival was 85.9% vs. 88.9% (P = 0.04), respectively. DCD is increasingly accepted in Europe but still limited to a few countries. Controlled DCD might negatively impact DBD activity. The degree of utilization of DCD is lower compared with DBD. Short‐term results of DCD are promising with differences between kidney recipients transplanted from controlled versus uncontrolled DCD, an observation to be further analyzed.

Spanish experience as a leading country: what kind of measures were taken?

A recent call for self‐sufficiency in transplantation issued by the WHO faces variable worldwide activity, in which Spain occupies a privileged position, with deceased donation rates of 33–35 per million population (pmp) and 85 transplants pmp. An evaluation of current challenges, including a decrease in deaths because of traffic accidents and cerebrovascular diseases, and a diversity of cultures in Spain, has been followed by a comprehensive strategy to increase organ availability. Actions include an earlier referral of possible donors to the transplant coordination teams, a benchmarking project to identify critical success factors in donation after brain death, new family approach and care methods, and the development of additional training courses aimed at specific groups of professionals, supported by their corresponding societies. Consensus documents to improve knowledge about safety limits for organ donation have been developed to minimize inappropriate discarding of organs. Use of organs from expanded criteria donors under an ‘old for old’ allocation policy has resulted from adaptation to the progressive decline of optimal organs. National strategic plans to deal better with organ shortage, while respecting solid ethical standards, are essential, as reflected in the WHO Guiding Principles and the Istanbul Declaration on Organ Trafficking and Transplant tourism.

A call for government accountability to achieve national self-sufficiency in organ donation and transplantation

Roughly 100,000 patients worldwide undergo organ transplantation annually, but many other patients remain on waiting lists. Transplantation rates vary substantially across countries. Affluent patients in nations with long waiting lists do not always wait for donations from within their own countries. Commercially driven transplantation, however, does not always ensure proper medical care of recipients or donors, and might lengthen waiting times for resident patients or increase the illegal and unethical purchase of organs from living donors. Governments should systematically address the needs of their countries according to a legal framework. Medical strategies to prevent end-stage organ failure must also be implemented. In view of the Madrid Resolution, the Declaration of Istanbul, and the 63rd World Health Assembly Resolution, a new paradigm of national self-sufficiency is needed. Each country or region should strive to provide a sufficient number of organs from within its own population, guided by WHO ethics principles.

The critical pathway for deceased donation: reportable uniformity in the approach to deceased donation

The critical pathway of deceased donation provides a systematic approach to the organ donation process, considering both donation after cardiac death than donation after brain death. The pathway provides a tool for assessing the potential of deceased donation and for the prospective identification and referral of possible deceased donors.

The 40 Donors Per Million Population Plan: An Action Plan for Improvement of Organ Donation and Transplantation in Spain

INTRODUCTION Spain has been showing the highest rate of deceased donor organ recovery in the world for a whole country, namely, 33-35 donors per million population (pmp) during the last years. This activity is attributed to the so-called Spanish Model of organ donation, an integrated approach to improve organ donation since the start of the Organización Nacional de Trasplantes (ONT) in 1989. However, in 2007 there were 7/17 regions with >40 donors pmp and a marked regional variability. Thus, ONT has set a large-scale, comprehensive strategy to achieve a substantial improvement in donation and transplantation in Spain in the coming years: The 40 Donors pmp Plan. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The overall objective is to increase the average rate of deceased donors to 40 pmp between 2008 and 2010. The areas of improvement, specific objectives, and actions have come from deep reflection on the data and the material generated from multidisciplinary discussions and open consultation with the donation and transplantation community. KEY AREAS SELECTED FOR ACTION Detection and management of brain-dead donors, with 4 specific subareas: access to intensive care units, new forms of hospital management, foreigners and ethnic minorities, and evaluation/maintenance of thoracic organ donors. Expanded criteria donors, with 3 subareas: aging, donors with positive tests to certain viral serologies, and donors with rare diseases. Special surgical techniques. Donation after cardiac death.

Long-term experience with kidney transplantation from hepatitis C-positive donors into hepatitis C-positive recipients.

Kidney transplantation from hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody positive donors (HCVD+) into HCV antibody positive recipients (HCVR+) is controversial. We implemented this policy in our units in 1990. Herein, we report the long‐term safety of this strategy. From March 1990 to March 2007, 162 HCVR+ received a kidney from HCVD+ (group 1) and 306 from HCVD− (group 2) in our units. Mean follow‐up was 74.5 months. Five‐and 10‐year patient survival was 84.8% and 72.7% in group 1 vs. 86.6% and 76.5% in group 2 (p = 0.250). Three deaths in group 1 and two in group 2 were liver‐disease related. Five‐ and 10‐year graft survival was 58.9% and 34.4% versus 65.5% and 47.6% respectively (p = 0.006) while death‐censored graft survival was 69% and 47% versus 72.7% and 58.5% (p = 0.055). Decompensated chronic liver disease was similar: 10.3% versus 6.2%. Cox‐regression analysis could not identify the donors HCV serology as a significant risk factor for death, graft failure and severe liver disease in HCVR+. In conclusion, long‐term outcome of HCVR+ transplanted with kidneys from HCVD+ seems good in terms of patient survival, graft survival and liver disease. HCVD+ was not a significant risk factor for mortality, graft failure and liver disease among HCVR+. These data strongly suggest that the use of kidneys from HCVD+ in HCVR+ is a safe long‐term strategy that helps to prevent kidney loss.

Transplantation in the patient with hepatitis C.

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most frequent cause of liver disease after renal transplantation. Its clinical course is irrelevant in the short term, except for rare cases of fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. However, in the long run, HCV infection can lead to major liver complications. Because interferon (IFN) is generally contraindicated in renal transplant patients, the best approach is to treat patients on dialysis. Until more information with pegylated‐IFN is available, the use of alpha‐IFN monotherapy is recommended. Most of the patients with sustained virological response remain HCV RNA negative after transplantation. HCV‐positive renal transplant patients have a higher risk for proteinuria, chronic rejection, infections and post‐transplant diabetes (PTDM). Long‐term patient‐ and graft‐survival rates are lower in HCV‐positive patients. Mortality is higher, mainly as a result of liver disease and infections. HCV can contribute to the development of certain neoplasias such as post‐transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD). HCV infection is also an independent risk factor for graft loss. PTDM, transplant glomerulopathy and HCV‐related glomerulonephritis can contribute to graft failure. Despite this, transplantation is the best option for end‐stage renal disease in HCV‐positive patients. Several measures to minimize the consequences of HCV infection have been recommended. Adjustment of immunosuppression and careful follow up in the outpatient clinic for early detection of HCV‐related complications are mandatory.

Donor Cancer Transmission in Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review

Transplantation of any biological material from a donor to a host will carry some inherent risk of disease transmission. Our aims were to summarize the totality of the published evidence about donor cancer transmission among kidney transplant recipients and to determine the cancer‐specific survival of these patients. We systematically reviewed all case reports, case series and registry studies that described the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with donor cancer transmission published to December 2012. A total of 69 studies with 104 donor‐transmitted cancer cases were identified. The most common transmitted cancer types were renal cancer (n = 20, 19%), followed by melanoma (n = 18, 17%), lymphoma (n = 15, 14%) and lung cancer (n = 9, 9%). Patients with melanoma and lung cancers had the worst prognosis, with less than 50% of recipients surviving after 24 months from transplantation. Recipients with transmitted renal cancers had the best outcomes, with over 70% of recipients surviving for at least 24 months after transplantation. Overall, the risk of donor transmission of cancer appears low, but there is a high likelihood of reporting bias. Our findings support the current recommendations for rejecting organs from donors with a history of melanoma and lung cancer, but suggest that the use of donor kidneys with a history of small, incidental renal cell cancer may be reasonable.

Continuously Evaluating Performance in Deceased Donation: The Spanish Quality Assurance Program

The Spanish Quality Assurance Program applied to the process of donation after brain death entails an internal stage consisting of a continuous clinical chart review of deaths in critical care units (CCUs) performed by transplant coordinators and periodical external audits to selected centers. This paper describes the methodology and provides the most relevant results of this program, with information analyzed from 206,345 CCU deaths. According to the internal audit, 2.3% of hospital deaths and 12.4% of CCU deaths in Spain yield potential donors (clinical criteria consistent with brain death). Out of the potential donors, 54.6% become actual donors, 26% are lost due to medical unsuitability, 13.3% due to refusals to donation, 3.1% due to maintenance problems and 3% due to other reasons. Although the national pool of potential donors after brain death has progressively decreased from 65.2 per million population (pmp) in 2001 to 49 pmp in 2010, the number of actual donors after brain death has remained at about 30 pmp. External audits reveal that the number of actual donors could be 21.6% higher if all potential donors were identified and preventable losses avoided. We encourage other countries to develop similar comprehensive approaches to deceased donation performance.

Living and deceased organ donation should be financially neutral acts

The supply of organs—particularly kidneys—donated by living and deceased donors falls short of the number of patients added annually to transplant waiting lists in the United States. To remedy this problem, a number of prominent physicians, ethicists, economists and others have mounted a campaign to suspend the prohibitions in the National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 (NOTA) on the buying and selling of organs. The argument that providing financial benefits would incentivize enough people to part with a kidney (or a portion of a liver) to clear the waiting lists is flawed. This commentary marshals arguments against the claim that the shortage of donor organs would best be overcome by providing financial incentives for donation. We can increase the number of organs available for transplantation by removing all financial disincentives that deter unpaid living or deceased kidney donation. These disincentives include a range of burdens, such as the costs of travel and lodging for medical evaluation and surgery, lost wages, and the expense of dependent care during the period of organ removal and recuperation. Organ donation should remain an act that is financially neutral for donors, neither imposing financial burdens nor enriching them monetarily.