Normothermic Regional Perfusion, Causes, and the Dead Donor Rule

Ethical Issues in Normothermic Regional Perfusion in Controlled Organ Donation After Determination of Death by Circulatory Criteria: A Scoping Review

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is a surgical technique that can improve the quality and number of organs recovered for donation after the determination of death by circulatory criteria. Despite its promise, adoption of NRP has been hindered because of unresolved ethical issues. To inform stakeholders, this scoping review provides an impartial overview of the major ethical controversies surrounding NRP. We undertook this review according to a modified 5-step methodology proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. Publications were retrieved through MEDLINE and Embase. Gray literature was sourced from Canadian organ donation organizations, English-language organ donation organization websites, and through our research networks. Three reviewers independently screened all documents for inclusion, extracted data, and participated in content analysis. Disagreements were resolved through consensus meetings. Seventy-one documents substantively engaging with ethical issues in NRP were included for full-text analysis. We identified 6 major themes encompassing a range of overlapping ethical debates: (1) the compatibility of NRP with the dead donor rule, the injunction that organ recovery cannot cause death, (2) the risk of donor harm posed by NRP, (3) uncertainties regarding consent requirements for NRP, (4) risks to stakeholder trust posed by NRP, (5) the implications of NRP for justice, and (6) NRP's potential to benefits of NRP for stakeholders. We found no agreement on the ethical permissibility of NRP. However, some debates may be resolved through additional empirical study. As decision-makers contemplate the adoption of NRP, it is critical to address the ethical issues facing the technique to ensure stakeholder trust in deceased donation and transplantation systems is preserved.

In Defense of Normothermic Regional Perfusion

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is a relatively new approach to procuring organs for transplantation. After circulatory death is declared, perfusion is restored to either the thoracoabdominal organs (in TA-NRP) or abdominal organs alone (in A-NRP) using extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Simultaneously, surgeons clamp the cerebral arteries, causing a fatal brain injury. Critics claim that clamping the arteries is the proximate cause of death in violation of the dead donor rule and that the procedure is therefore unethical. We disagree. This account does not consider the myriad other factors that contribute to the death of the donor, including the presence of a fatal medical condition, the decision to withdraw life support, and the physician's actions in withdrawing life support and administering medication that may hasten death. Instead, we claim that physicians play a causative role in many of the events that lead to a patient's death and that these actions are often ethically and legally justified. We advance an "all things considered" view according to which TA-NRP may be considered ethically acceptable insofar as it avoids suffering and respects the wishes of the patient to improve the lives of others through organ donation. We conclude with a series of critical questions related to the practice of NRP and call for the development of national consensus on this issue in the United States.

Sowing "seeds of trust": How trust in normothermic regional perfusion is built in a continuum of care

Normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) is a promising technology to improve organ transplantation outcomes by reversing ischemic injury caused by controlled donation after circulatory determination of death. However, it has not yet been implemented in Canada due to ethical questions. These issues must be resolved to preserve public trust in organ donation and transplantation. This qualitative, constructivist grounded theory study sought to understand how those most impacted by NRP perceived the ethical implications. We interviewed 29 participants across stakeholder groups of donor families, organ recipients, donation and transplantation system leaders, and care providers. The interview protocol included a short presentation about the purpose of NRP and procedures in abdomen versus chest and abdomen NRP, followed by questions probing potential violations of the dead donor rule and concerns regarding brain reperfusion. The results present a grounded theory placing NRP within a trust-building continuum of care for the donor, their family, and organ recipients. Stakeholders consistently described both forms of NRP as an ethical intervention, but their rationales were predicated on assumptions that neurologic criteria for death had been met following circulatory death determination. Empirical validation of these assumptions will help ground the implementation of NRP in a trust-preserving way.