Lower rate of family refusal for organ donation in non-heart-beating versus brain-dead donors.

INTRODUCTION: Family refusal is an important factor that limits the number of organ donors. Cultural and religious factors as well as perception of brain death are the principal reasons for these refusals. We examined whether the type of potential donor, that is brain-dead or non-heart-beating, had an influence on family refusal. In July 2005, we initiated a program of non-heart-beating donors who had died in the street or at home. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared family refusals among these potential donors with those among potential brain-dead donors from July 2005 to October 2008. RESULTS: The mean time of stay in the hospital was significantly greater for brain-dead donors than those who were non-heart-beating: 4 +/- 2 versus 0.23 +/- 0.01 days (P < .01). The rate of family refusals was significantly greater among the families of potential brain-dead donors, that is 24% (24/99) than non-heart-beating donors, that is, 4% (2/47; P < .01). Donor age was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: The rate of family refusals among potential non-heart-beating donors was significantly lower than that among families of brain-dead individuals. Greater understanding of death because the heart is not beating, less time of uncertainty about death, and shorter hospital stay could explain this difference.

Kidneys from elderly deceased donors discarded for transplantation.

Although deceased donors older than 60 years of age (D > 60) are increasing in number, little information exists on the rate of discarded kidneys from these aged individuals. This study sought to analyze causes of discard of kidneys from D > 60. Since 1997, we have transplanted kidneys from D > 60 into elderly recipients after assessing their functional and anatomical viability. Among 3444 renal offers for transplantation between 1997 and 2005, 1967 (57%) came from D > 60. Of these, 1145 offers were discarded, because the kidney donor was not adequate (n = 470) or because there was no elderly recipient on our waiting list (n = 675). We also examined 1745 kidneys, 822 (47%) of which came from D > 60. The percentage of discarded kidneys due to macroscopic or microscopic alterations was 46% in the D > 60 group compared with 14.7% in the donor group younger than 60 years of age (D < 60; P < .01). We transplanted 443 kidneys from D > 60 (85 dual, 273 single) to 358 recipients of matching age and 900 kidneys from D < 60. Three-year death-censored actuarial graft survival rate was 83% for D > 60 compared with 89% for D < 60 transplant (P = not significant). In conclusion, kidneys from D > 60 were discarded for transplantation mainly because there was no elderly recipient on the waiting list and due to macroscopic or microscopic alterations. Given the increasing offer of kidneys from D > 60 and the good results of transplantation with these aged kidneys in elderly recipients, the indications for kidney transplantation should be expanded to include more of the elderly population on dialysis to the waiting list.