Potential organ donors during two years at the second largest hospital in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Western Norway has the lowest number of actual deceased organ donors per million inhabitants in Norway. We wished to find the total number of potential donors and donor organs during 2 years at Haukeland University Hospital, the largest hospital in the region, and evaluate where and why potential donors were lost. METHODS: We evaluated all patients who died at Haukeland University Hospital in 2018-19. We checked if intensive care patients, filling the criteria as organ donors after brain death, became donors, and the reasons why potential donors were lost. We also estimated the number of potential donors after circulatory death. We checked if patients transferred from the intensive care units and patients never admitted to intensive care were potential donors. Location, gender, age, and possible number of organs were registered. RESULTS: Of 1453 in-hospital deaths, 20 brain-dead patients became actual donors. One brain-dead and two other potential donors, one of them discharged to a bed ward, were not evaluated at the intensive care units. Relatives refused in five patients. Three fulfilled the Norwegian criteria from 2021 as organ donors after circulatory death. Ten potential donors after brain death were never admitted to intensive care and died on neurological or neurosurgical wards. If all potential organ donors were realised, the number of donors would double. The number of transplanted organs would increase less, as organs used per donor would drop from 3.50 to 2.90. CONCLUSION: Our study cannot explain the low number of donors in our region compared with the rest of Norway. If all potential donations were implemented, the number of actual donors would double. Patients dying outside the intensive care units represent the largest potential source for extra donors, maximally increasing the number of donors by 42%, high-quality livers 44% and kidneys 18%. Introducing organ donation after circulatory death may increase the number of donors by 15% and the number of high-quality livers and kidneys by 12%.

Donation after circulatory death today: an updated overview of the European landscape.

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.

First Scandinavian Protocol for Controlled Donation After Circulatory Death Using Normothermic Regional Perfusion.

BACKGROUND: Donation after circulatory death (DCD) can increase the pool of available organs for transplantation. This pilot study evaluates the implementation of a controlled DCD (cDCD) protocol using normothermic regional perfusion in Norway. METHODS: Patients aged 16 to 60 years that are in coma with documented devastating brain injury in need of mechanical ventilation, who would most likely attain cardiac arrest within 60 minutes after extubation, were eligible. With the acceptance from the next of kin and their wish for organ donation, life support was withdrawn and cardiac arrest observed. After a 5-minute no-touch period, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for post mortem regional normothermic regional perfusion was established. Cerebral and cardiac reperfusion was prevented by an aortic occlusion catheter. Measured glomerular filtration rates 1 year postengraftment were compared between cDCD grafts and age-matched grafts donated after brain death (DBD). RESULTS: Eight cDCD were performed from 2014 to 2015. Circulation ceased median 12 (range, 6-24) minutes after withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. Fourteen kidneys and 2 livers were retrieved and subsequently transplanted. Functional warm ischemic time was 26 (20-51) minutes. Regional perfusion was applied for 97 minutes (54-106 minutes). Measured glomerular filtration rate 1 year postengraftment was not significantly different between cDCD and donation after brain death organs, 75 (65-76) vs 60 (37-112) mL/min per 1.73 m2 (P = 0.23). No complications have been observed in the 2 cDCD livers. CONCLUSION: A protocol for cDCD is successfully established in Norway. Excellent transplant outcomes have encouraged us to continue this work addressing the shortage of organs for transplantation.

Liver transplantation in the Nordic countries - An intention to treat and post-transplant analysis from The Nordic Liver Transplant Registry 1982-2013.

AIM AND BACKGROUND: The Nordic Liver Transplant Registry (NLTR) accounts for all liver transplants performed in the Nordic countries since the start of the transplant program in 1982. Due to short waiting times, donor liver allocation has been made without considerations of the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. We aimed to summarize key outcome measures and developments for the activity up to December 2013. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The registry is integrated with the operational waiting-list and liver allocation system of Scandiatransplant (www.scandiatransplant.org) and accounted at the end of 2013 for 6019 patients out of whom 5198 were transplanted. Data for recipient and donor characteristics and relevant end-points retransplantation and death are manually curated on an annual basis to allow for statistical analysis and the annual report. RESULTS: Primary sclerosing cholangitis, acute hepatic failure, alcoholic liver disease, primary biliary cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma are the five most frequent diagnoses (accounting for 15.3%, 10.8%, 10.6%, 9.3% and 9.0% of all transplants, respectively). Median waiting time for non-urgent liver transplantation during the last 10-year period was 39 days. Outcome has improved over time, and for patients transplanted during 2004-2013, overall one-, five- and 10-year survival rates were 91%, 80% and 71%, respectively. In an intention-to-treat analysis, corresponding numbers during the same time period were 87%, 75% and 66%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The liver transplant program in the Nordic countries provides comparable outcomes to programs with a MELD-based donor liver allocation system. Unique features comprise the diagnostic spectrum, waiting times and the availability of an integrated waiting list and transplant registry (NLTR).

Doctors' attitudes to organ donation.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing need for organs for transplantation purposes. Knowledge and attitudes among the medical team may affect the donation process. When respiration and cardiac activity are being sustained by artificial means, Norwegian law requires angiographic evidence of cessation of cerebral circulation as well as clinical examination before an organ donation can be carried out. We wished to survey Norwegian doctors' attitudes to organ donation and how donation processes are being addressed. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A questionnaire with pre-defined response alternatives was distributed to doctors in intensive-care units as well as to specialists and junior registrars in neurosurgery in Norwegian donor hospitals in 2008-2009. RESULTS: Altogether 435 doctors (55%) returned a completed questionnaire. A total of 315 of 420 (75%) responded that they would consider initiating organ-preserving treatment when there is no more hope for the patient, while 18% were uncertain and 7% responded that they would not consider this option. Altogether 68 of 424 (16%) maintained that if an organ donation was relevant and current legislation could be disregarded, clinical diagnostics would be sufficient to establish a diagnosis of death. Another 22% were uncertain, while 62% were of the opinion that clinical diagnostics would be insufficient. A total of 258 of 416 (62%) reported that in their opinion, the next of kin most often could understand the implications of total destruction of the brain when this was explained to them. INTERPRETATION: Future teaching should emphasise the opportunity for organ-preserving treatment in cases where a fatal outcome is expected.

Organ donation and Norwegian doctors' need for training.

BACKGROUND: The skill of the person who asks about organ donation and the timing of the conversation may have an impact on the likelihood of obtaining consent from a patient's relatives. The purpose of the study was to investigate the experience that intensive care doctors and neurosurgeons have of treating organ donors and communicating with their relatives, as well as the doctors' own learning needs. MATERIAL AND METHOD: In 2008, we sent a questionnaire to all doctors at all intensive-care units at all donor hospitals in Norway, and to all neurosurgeons/neurosurgical trainees. RESULTS: Altogether 435 doctors (55 per cent) responded to the questionnaire. Of these, 63 per cent were specialists in intensive care medicine. More than half had little experience of organ donation or how to relate to the patients' relatives. Many of them reported a need to learn more about the medical issues associated with organ donation and about communication in this situation. INTERPRETATION: Many doctors fail to adhere to recommended practice in their encounters with relatives. Training programmes should focus especially on communication with relatives.

[Liver transplantation in Norway through 25 years]. / Levertransplantasjon i Norge gjennom 25 år.

BACKGROUND: In Norway, liver transplantation has been the treatment of choice for irreversible acute and chronic liver failure for 25 years. The aim of this article is to present a summary of the results obtained. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All liver transplants performed in Norway in the period 25.02.84-31.12.08 have been reviewed retrospectively with respect to patient and donor epidemiology, survival and recurrence. RESULTS: 651 transplants have been performed in this period. The annual number of transplants increased gradually up to the year 2000 (31), and more steeply afterwards - to 79 in 2008. Also the number of organ donations has increased and reached 98 (20 pr. million inh.) in 2008. 5-year patient survival was 53 % in the period 1984-1994. In the period 2001-2008, 1-year survival was 90 % and 5-year survival was 83 %. INTERPRETATION: The gradual improvement of results should be interpreted in light of improvements within transplant surgery, medicine and anaesthesiology and the increased local experience due to the increasing number of transplants performed. The transplant centre at Rikshospitalet has developed into being among the largest of its kind within the Nordic Countries and the results compare well with the best international data.

Kidneys from deceased donors more than 75 years perform acceptably after transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Organ shortage has resulted in an increased use of expanded criteria donors for transplantation, in particular kidneys from older donors. There is limited data on the impact of donor age more than 75 years on kidney transplant outcome. METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis on deceased donors more than 75 years and kidney transplant outcome in an old for old setting was performed. Histologic findings (global kidney score) in graft biopsies and deceased-donor scores were evaluated to observe if this information could be helpful in predicting outcome. RESULTS: Evaluation of data from 54 single kidney transplantations from 29 donors more than 75 years (median 77.5, range 75.2-86.1) were assessed. Ninety-three percent of the donors died of intracranial bleeding, and 69% had a history of hypertension or cardiovascular event(s). Median recipient age was 70.1 (range 50.6-82.4). Fifty-two grafts (96%) had posttransplant function. Death censored graft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years were 87%, 83%, and 83%, respectively. Patient survival was 81%, 75%, and 59% at the same time points. At follow-up at median 23 months (range 6-144 months), thirty-five recipients were alive with a median serum creatinine of 163 micromol/ L (range 103-348). Global kidney score and deceased donor score did not predict graft outcome. CONCLUSION: Kidney transplants from deceased donors more than 75 years perform acceptable as single transplants and should be considered for use in older recipients.