Organ donation from patients with a rare disease is often safe: the italian guidelines.

Although a disease is defined as rare when it has a prevalence of less than 1:2000, the overall prevalence of rare diseases in the population is greater than 1%. Among potential organ donors, a similar frequency is observed. To date, guidelines have not been established, and operational decisions have been made empirically, case- by-case, based on the experience and expertise of clinicians. For this reason, the Italian Superior Health Council (CSS) has appointed a working Group to address "patients with a rare disease as potential organ donors," with the aim of devising recommendations for the management of transplant cases in which the donors have a rare disease. This group evaluated 493 diseases (10% of all rare diseases, including over 95% of patients with a rare disease) to deliver a technical report dealing with the suitability of organ donation and transplantation, with a focus on the organs most frequently used, including kidney, liver, heart, lung, and pancreas. This work has made it clear that a rare disease "per se" does not contraindicate organ donation at all. Indeed, in donors affected by a rare disease, almost 80% of the organs are suitable for transplantation, approximately 7% are unsuitable, and approximately 14% are suitable as non-standard with an acceptable risk.

Rare Disease Patients as Potential Organ Donors.

BACKGROUND: Rare diseases (RDs) are a heterogeneous group of pathologies, which, when present in a donor, with their anatomic or functional deficiencies, may put the recipient at risk. The aim of our work is to analyze the incidence of RDs in our donors to support transplant experts in the evaluation of these organs. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed the incidence of RDs in donors from July 2017 to June 2019, along with the risk attributed, the number of transplanted organs, and the follow-up results of the recipients. RESULTS: Over a 24-month period, we had 19 donors with RDs. Of those, the organs of 4 donors were rejected before the risk assessment, the organs of 4 other donors were deemed an unacceptable risk, the organs of 4 more donors were rejected by transplant centers, and the organs of 7 donors were accepted with 16 organs ultimately transplanted (2 hearts, 3 livers, and 11 kidneys). Three of the recipients died of causes not related to the RDs. Thirteen of the recipients are still alive with a functioning organ with an average follow-up of 9 months. CONCLUSIONS: Although the evaluation of the results is influenced by the limited follow-up period, the use of donors with RDs has proved safe. One of the critical issues encountered in the evaluation process was the impossibility of carrying out genetic and histologic investigations for each organ in urgency. Moreover, the heterogeneity of RDs and the lack of solid literature data require, for the purpose of assessing the level of risk, a specific assessment of individual cases. To overcome these limitations, a group of experts was set up at the Superior Health Council, who drafted a reference document, which allowed for the assessment of the suitability and risk level of donors with the most frequent RDs.