ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2017
Early declaration of death by neurologic criteria results in greater organ donor potential.
Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Attitudes That Might Impact upon Donation after Brain Death in Intensive Care Unit Settings: A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- In reply: Mistaken concepts on the use of ancillary testing in brain death diagnosis.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2022Article
- Analysis of brain death declaration process and its impact on organ donation in a reference trauma center.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2020Observational
- Advances in Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering: Innovation and Transformation of Medicine.Stem cells international · 2018Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAggressive management of patients prior to and after determination of death by neurologic criteria (DNC) is necessary to optimize organ recovery, transplantation, and increase the number of organs transplanted per donor (OTPD). The effects of time management are understudied but potentially pivotal component. The objective of this study was to analyze specific time points (time to DNC, time to procurement) and the time intervals between them to better characterize the optimal timeline of organ donation.
methodsUsing data over a 5-year time period (2011-2015) from the largest US OPO, all patients with catastrophic brain injury and donated transplantable organs were retrospectively reviewed. Active smokers were excluded. Maximum donor potential was seven organs (heart, lungs [2], kidneys [2], liver, and pancreas). Time from admission to declaration of DNC and donation was calculated. Mean time points stratified by specific organ procurement rates and overall OTPD were compared using unpaired t-test.
resultsOf 1719 Declaration of Death by Neurologic Criteria organ donors, 381 were secondary to head trauma. Smokers and organs recovered but not transplanted were excluded leaving 297 patients. Males comprised 78.8%, the mean age was 36.0 (±16.8) years, and 87.6% were treated at a trauma center. Higher donor potential (>4 OTPD) was associated with shorter average times from admission to brain death; 66.6 versus 82.2 hours, P = 0.04. Lung donors were also associated with shorter average times from admission to brain death; 61.6 versus 83.6 hours, P = 0.004. The time interval from DNC to donation varied minimally among groups and did not affect donation rates.
conclusionsA shorter time interval between admission and declaration of DNC was associated with increased OTPD, especially lungs. Further research to identify what role timing plays in the management of the potential organ donor and how that relates to donor management goals is needed.
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.