Ethical challenges in nephrology: a call for action.

The American Society of Nephrology, the European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association and the International Society of Nephrology Joint Working Group on Ethical Issues in Nephrology have identified ten broad areas of ethical concern as priority challenges that require collaborative action. Here, we describe these challenges - equity in access to kidney failure care, avoiding futile dialysis, reducing dialysis costs, shared decision-making in kidney failure care, living donor risk evaluation and decision-making, priority setting in kidney disease prevention and care, the ethical implications of genetic kidney diseases, responsible advocacy for kidney health and management of conflicts of interest - with the aim of highlighting the need for ethical analysis of specific issues, as well as for the development of tools and training to support clinicians who treat patients with kidney disease in practising ethically and contributing to ethical policy-making.

Will you give my kidney back? Organ restitution in living-related kidney transplantation: ethical analyses.

In this article, we perform a thought experiment about living donor kidney transplantation. If a living kidney donor becomes in need of renal replacement treatment due to dysfunction of the remaining kidney after donation, can the donor ask the recipient to give back the kidney that had been donated? We call this problem organ restitution and discussed it from the ethical viewpoint. Living organ transplantation is a kind of 'designated donation' and subsequently has a contract-like character. First, assuming a case in which original donor (A) wishes the return of the organ which had been transplanted into B, and the original recipient (B) agrees, organ restitution will be permissible based on contract-like agreement. However, careful and detailed consideration is necessary to determine whether this leaves no room to question the authenticity of B's consent. Second, if B offers to give back the organ to A, then B's act is a supererogatory act, and is praiseworthy and meritorious. Such an offer is a matter of virtue, not obligation. Third, if A wishes B to return the organ, but B does not wish/allow this to happen, it is likely difficult to justify returning the organ to A by violating B's right to bodily integrity. But B's refusal to return the donated organ cannot be deemed praiseworthy, because B forgets the great kindness once received from A. Rather than calling this an obligation, we encourage B to consider such virtuous conduct.

Understanding of Brain Death Among Health-Care Professionals at a Transplant Center.

INTRODUCTION: There is considerable variation in brain death understanding and policies between medical institutions, however, studies have not yet compared different health-care professionals working in the same hospital. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: The overall aim of this study was to evaluate understanding of brain death among health-care professionals within intensive care units (ICUs) at a single institution. DESIGN: Study participants included 217 attending physicians, residents, nurses, medical students, and other ICU team members in 6 ICUs. Participants completed a 21-question survey pertaining to knowledge of brain death and related institutional policies as well as opinions about brain death. RESULTS: We found a wide range of brain death understanding among health-care professionals in ICUs. Attending physicians have the greatest understanding (94.7%), followed by nurses (72.4%). In contrast, approximately half of the students and residents do not have a basic understanding of brain death. Brain death understanding was correlated to health-care role, years of experience, and whether the participant had formal training in brain death. Although most participants had been involved in cases of brain death, a much smaller number had received formal training on death by neurological criteria. DISCUSSION: The present study observed a paucity of clinical training in brain death among health-care professionals in the study ICUs. There is an opportunity for improved clinical education on brain death that could improve communication with families about brain death and potentially increase the number of organs transplanted.

Reuse of cardiac organs in transplantation: an ethical analysis.

BACKGROUND: This paper examines the ethical aspects of organ transplant surgery in which a donor heart is transplanted from a first recipient, following determination of death by neurologic criteria, to a second recipient. Retransplantation in this sense differs from that in which one recipient undergoes repeat heart transplantation of a newly donated organ, and is thus referred to here as "reuse cardiac organ transplantation." METHODS: Medical, legal, and ethical analysis, with a main focus on ethical analysis. RESULTS: From the medical perspective, it is critical to ensure the quality and safety of reused organs, but we lack sufficient empirical data pertaining to medical risk. From the legal perspective, a comparative examination of laws in the United States and Japan affirms no illegality, but legal scholars disagree on the appropriate analysis of the issues, including whether or not property rights apply to transplanted organs. Ethical arguments supporting the reuse of organs include the analogous nature of donation to gifts, the value of donations as inheritance property, and the public property theory as it pertains to organs. Meanwhile, ethical arguments such as those that address organ recycling and identity issues challenge organ reuse. CONCLUSION: We conclude that organ reuse is not only ethically permissible, but even ethically desirable. Furthermore, we suggest changes to be implemented in the informed consent process prior to organ transplantation. The organ transplant community worldwide should engage in wider and deeper discussions, in hopes that such efforts will lead to the timely preparation of guidelines to implement reuse cardiac organ transplantation as well as reuse transplantation of other organs such as kidney and liver.

Self-Reported Employment Status and Social Participation After Successful Kidney Transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Kidney transplantation (KTX) is considered the treatment of choice for most individuals with end-stage kidney disease. The purpose of this study was to assess the employment status and social participation after successful KTX. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. Eligible participants were patients who received a transplant ≥1 year ago and who were previously on hemodialysis (HD) for ≥1 year. Two hundred individuals participated in this study. RESULTS: A significant number (93.5%) of patients reported they were working prior to HD versus 35% while on HD. Only 14% reported receiving disability benefits prior to HD versus 75% receiving disability while on HD. Comparing transplant recipients with pre-HD patients, 35.5% versus 93.5% reported working, and 74.5% versus 14% reported receiving disability benefits, respectively. After transplant, patients were more likely to join recreational clubs, travel frequently, and participate in recreational/religious activities and social events than when they were on HD. CONCLUSION: Posttransplant, these individuals are more likely to participate in social and leisure activities, but the majority did not resume employment and continued to receive disability payments. Future studies could explore barriers to employment in patients who underwent successful transplantation and the causes and factors as to why these individuals continue to receive disability benefits.

When there are no good choices: illuminating the borderland between proportionate palliative sedation and palliative sedation to unconsciousness.

BACKGROUND: Despite state-of-the-art palliative care, some patients will require proportionate palliative sedation as a last-resort option to relieve intolerable suffering at the end of life. In this practice, progressively increasing amounts of sedation are provided until the target suffering is sufficiently relieved. Uncertainty and debate arise when this practice approaches palliative sedation to unconsciousness (PSU), especially when unconsciousness is specifically intended or when the target symptoms are more existential than physical. METHODS: We constructed a case series designed to highlight some of the common approaches and challenges associated with PSU and the more aggressive end of the spectrum of proportionate palliative sedation as retrospectively identified by palliative care consultants over the past 5 years from a busy inpatient palliative care service at a tertiary medical center in Rochester (NY, USA). RESULTS: Ten cases were identified as challenging by the palliative care attendings, of which four were selected for presentation for illustrative purposes because they touched on central issues including loss of capacity, the role of existential suffering, the complexity of clinical intention, the role of an institutional policy and use of anesthetics as sedative agents. Two other cases were selected focusing on responses to two special situations: a request for PSU that was rejected; and anticipatory planning for total sedation in the future. CONCLUSION: Although relatively rare, PSU and more aggressive end-of-the-spectrum proportionate palliative sedation represent responses to some of the most challenging cases faced by palliative care clinicians. These complex cases clearly require open communication and collaboration among caregivers, patients and family. Knowing how to identify these circumstances, and how to approach these interventions of last resort are critical skills for practitioners who take care of patients at the end of life.

Ethical issues in palliative care.

Ethical concerns are common in palliative care settings. Rather than provide an exhaustive list of possible ethical problems one may come upon, this article describes areas of concern that are frequently encountered by perioperative health care providers, especially anesthesiologists, in the palliative care arena.

Home glucometer monitoring markedly improves diagnosis of post renal transplant diabetes mellitus in renal transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Definitions of de novo posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) have varied widely in the renal transplant literature, and most have not used the American Diabetes Association (ADA) definition of diabetes (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] > or = 126 mg/dl on two occasions, or a casual plasma glucose level >200 mg/dl). Most patients are monitored for PTDM by 12-hour FPG levels drawn for clinic visits. In contrast, we describe the diagnosis of PTDM by home glucometer monitoring METHODS: We screened 89 consecutive nondiabetic renal transplant recipients for PTDM by ADA criteria and home glucometer monitoring during the first 3 months posttransplant RESULTS: Of 23 patients with impaired fasting glucose levels of 111-126 mg/dl, 14 (61%) met ADA criteria for diabetes mellitus of based on home glucometer monitoring. The incidence of de novo PTDM was 31% during this period. Predictors of PTDM in a Cox proportional hazards model were race and acute rejection, with a trend towards BMI. Clinic visit FPG levels did not differ between PTDM and non-PTDM patients. All diagnoses were made based on prelunch or supper FPG >200 mg/dl. CONCLUSIONS: Overnight FPG are inadequate for diagnosis of PTDM. All renal transplant recipients with impaired FPG should, at minimum, have home FPG testing.