ArticleWorld journal of surgery2017
Organ Dysfunction and Failure Following Brain Death Do Not Preclude Successful Donation.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computed tomography angiography scoring systems and the role of skull defects in the confirmation of brain death.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Article
- [Decision-making support in Intensive Care to facilitate organ donation : Position paper of the Ethics Section and the Organ Donation and Transplantation Section of the German Interdisciplinary Association of Critical Care and Emergency Medicine (DIVI) in collaboration with the Ethics Section of the German Society of Medical Intensive Care Medicine and Emergency Medicine (DGIIN)].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOrgan dysfunction is common after neurologic determination of death (NDD) but before organ collection. Reliable markers for graft success following transplant of these organs would be useful. We sought to determine the relationship between the donor after neurologic determination of death (DNDD) pathophysiology and successful organ donation.
methodsDonor information was obtained through the local organ procurement organization. Donor demographics and clinical data points for cardiovascular, renal, respiratory, hepatic, hematological and neuroendocrine systems were reviewed 12 h before and 12 h after neurologic determination of death was declared. The worst values were utilized for analysis and generation of the organ-specific Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores. SOFA scores were calculated and used to quantify the degree of organ dysfunction. The NDD non-donors for a specific organ were used as a comparison control group. The control group refers to DNDD patients whose specific organs were not transplanted. Lack of use was mostly due to discard by the transplant team as a result of unsuitability of the organ caused by deterioration or possible donor-specific pathology.
resultsOne hundred and five organ donors were analyzed. Mean age was 35.0 (± 13.6), 78.1% male, median GCS 3, interquartile range (IQR) 3-4 and median injury severity score 32 (IQR 25-43). Of the successful donors, organ-specific severe dysfunction (SOFA 3 or 4) occurred in 96, 27.5 and 3.3% of cardiac, lung and liver donors, respectively. There was no significant difference between the levels of organ dysfunction in donors versus non-donors except lung donors, in which the median lowest partial pressure of arterial oxygen-to-fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F) ratio in the non-donor was 194 (IQR 121.8-308.3) compared to the median lowest P/F ratio in the donor which was 287 (IQR 180-383.5), p = 0.02. In the recipients, graft failure 6 months after transplantation was reported in one kidney recipient (0.74%) (peak donor creatinine = 1 mg/dL) and in five pancreas recipients (11.4%). The median peak glucose of the pancreas donors in failed recipients was 178 mg/dL (IQR 157-213), whereas in the functioning recipients, the median glucose of their donors was not different (185 mg/dL, IQR 157-216), p = 0.394.
conclusionCurrent measures of organ failure and dysfunction do not predict the success of organ donation. Successful donor management in the face of severe organ dysfunction and failure can result in lives saved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.