An analysis of heart donation after circulatory determination of death

The Ethics of Heart Donation After the Circulatory Determination of Death: Gaps in Knowledge and Research Opportunities

In 2023, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) organized a workshop to identify research gap areas in organ donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD). We present the findings of the DCDD ethics working group. Heart DCDD, as all DCDD, may disrupt optimal end-of-life care. Irrespective of organ donation, research opportunities include identifying which processes of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy offer optimum patient comfort, how best to ensure patient comfort at the end of life, and how to better understand patients' preferences for end-of-life care. Whether heart DCDD breaches the Dead Donor Rule (DDR) depends on its interpretation, the validity and rationale of the determination of death, and the DCDD protocol used. Further research could clarify the interpretation of the DDR, the concept and determination of death, the time the cessation of brain function ensures that the patient is beyond neuro-cognitive harm, the implications of thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion on the determination of death and on brain functions, and the type of consent and level of information required for different DCDD techniques.

Ethics of Procuring and Using Organs or Tissue from Infants and Newborns for Transplantation, Research, or Commercial Purposes: Protocol for a Bioethics Scoping Review

Since the inception of transplantation, it has been crucial to ensure that organ or tissue donations are made with valid informed consent to avoid concerns about coercion or exploitation. This issue is particularly challenging when it comes to infants and younger children, insofar as they are unable to provide consent. Despite their vulnerability, infants' organs and tissues are considered valuable for biomedical purposes due to their size and unique properties. This raises questions about the conditions under which it is permissible to remove and use these body parts for transplantation, research, or commercial purposes. The aim of this protocol is to establish a foundation for a scoping review that will identify, clarify, and categorise the main ethical arguments regarding the permissibility of removing and using organs or tissues from infants. The scoping review will follow the methodology outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI), consisting of five stages: (1) identifying the research question, (2) developing the search strategy, (3) setting inclusion criteria, (4) extracting data, and (5) presenting and analysing the results. We will include both published and unpublished materials that explicitly discuss the ethical arguments related to the procurement and use of infant organs or tissues in the biomedical context. The search will cover various databases, including the National Library of Medicine, Web of Science, EBSCO, and others, as well as grey literature sources. Two raters will independently assess the eligibility of articles, and data from eligible studies will be extracted using a standardised form. The extracted data will then be analysed descriptively through qualitative content analysis.

Background

There has been debate about how to respect the rights and interests of organ and tissue donors since the beginning of transplantation practice, given the moral risks involved in procuring parts of their bodies and using them for transplantation or research. A major concern has been to ensure that, at a minimum, donation of organs or other bodily tissues for transplantation or research is done under conditions of valid informed consent, so as to avoid coercion or exploitation among other moral harms. In the case of infants and younger children, however, this concern poses special difficulties insofar as infants and younger children are deemed incapable of providing valid consent. Due to their diminutive size and other distinctive properties, infants' organs and tissues are seen as valuable for biomedical purposes. Yet, the heightened vulnerability of infants raises questions about when and whether it is ever permissible to remove these body parts or use them in research or for other purposes. The aim of this protocol is to form the basis of a systematic scoping review to identify, clarify, and systematise the main ethical arguments for and against the permissibility of removing and using infant or newborn (hereafter, "infant") organs or tissues in the biomedical context (i.e. for transplantation, research, or commercial purposes).

Methods

Our scoping review will broadly follow the well-established methodology outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute ( Peters et al., 2020). We will follow a five-stage review process: (1) identification of the research question, (2) development of the search strategy, (3) inclusion criteria, (4) data extraction, and (5) presentation and analysis of the results. Published and unpublished bibliographic material (including reports, dissertations, book chapters, etc.) will be considered based on the following inclusion criteria: the presence of explicit (bio)ethical arguments or reasons (concept) for or against the procurement and use of organs or tissues from infants, defined as a child from birth until 1 year old (population), in the biomedical domain, including transplantation, research, and commercial development (context). We will search for relevant studies in the National Library of Medicine (including PubMed and MEDLINE), Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, EBSCO, Google Scholar, PhilPapers, The Bioethics Literature Database (BELIT), EthxWeb as well as grey literature sources (e.g., Google, BASE, OpenGrey, and WorldCat) and the reference lists of key studies to identify studies suitable for inclusion. A three-stage search strategy will be used to determine the eligibility of articles, as recommended by the JBI methodological guidelines. We will exclude sources if (a) the full text is not accessible, (b) the main text is in a language other than English, or (c) the focus is exclusively on scientific, legal, or religious/theological arguments. All articles will be independently assessed for eligibility between two raters (MB & XL); data from eligible articles will be extracted and charted using a standardised data extraction form. The extracted data will be analysed descriptively using basic qualitative content analysis.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical review is not required as scoping reviews are a form of secondary data analysis that synthesise data from publicly available sources. Our dissemination strategy includes peer review publication, presentation at conferences, and outreach to relevant stakeholders.

Results

The results will be reported according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. An overview of the general data from the included studies will be presented in the form of graphs or tables showing the distribution of studies by year or period of publication, country of origin, and key ethical arguments. These results will be accompanied by a narrative summary describing how each included study or article relates to the aims of this review. Research gaps will be identified and limitations of the review will also be highlighted.

Conclusions

A paper summarising the findings from this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. In addition, a synthesis of the key findings will be disseminated to biomedical settings (e.g., conferences or workshops, potentially including ones linked to university hospitals) in the UK, USA, Türkiye, and Singapore. They will also be shared with the academic community and policy makers involved in the organ procurement organisations (OPO), which will potentially consider our recommendations in their decision-making processes regarding infant tissue/organ donation practice in these countries.

Strengths and limitations of this study

The use of a rigorous, well-established methodological framework will ensure the production of a high-quality scoping review that will contribute to the bioethics literature.A comprehensive search of disciplinary and cross-disciplinary databases will be undertaken to ensure coverage of all possible sources that meet the inclusion criteria for the review.This review will focus exclusively on infant tissue/organ procurement/use in biomedical contexts, providing a comprehensive and reliable source of ethical arguments for future debates on this sensitive topic.The review will be limited to articles published in English, which increases the risk of missing relevant sources published in other languages.The review will be limited to articles for which the full text is available, which increases the risk of missing relevant sources that otherwise may have been included in the scoping review had the full text been accessible.

Restoring the Organism as a Whole: Does NRP Resurrect the Dead?

The introduction of normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) in controlled donation after circulatory determination of death (cDCDD) protocols is by some regarded as controversial and ethically troublesome. One of the main concerns that opponents have about introducing NRP in cDCDD protocols is that reestablishing circulation will negate the determination of death by circulatory criteria, potentially resuscitating the donor. In this article, I argue that this is not the case. If we take a closer look at the concept of death underlying the circulatory criterion for determination of death, we find that the purpose of the criterion is to show whether the organism as a whole has died. I argue that this purpose is fulfilled by the circulatory criterion in cDCDD protocols, and that applying NRP does not negate the determination of death or resuscitate the donor.

Dilemmas concerning heart procurement in controlled donation after circulatory death

With an expanding population at risk for heart failure and the resulting increase in patients admitted to the waiting list for heart transplantation, the demand of viable organs exceeds the supply of suitable donor hearts. Use of hearts after circulatory death has reduced this deficit. Two primary techniques for heart procurement in circulatory death donors have been described: direct procurement and perfusion and thoraco-abdominal normothermic regional perfusion. While the former has been accepted as an option for heart procurement in circulatory death donors, the latter technique has raised some ethical questions in relation to the dead donor rule. In this paper we discuss the current dilemmas regarding these heart procurement protocols in circulatory death donors.

Brain death debates: from bioethics to epistemology

50 years after its introduction, brain death remains controversial among scholars. The debates focus on one question: is brain death a good criterion for determining death? This question has been answered from various perspectives: medical, metaphysical, ethical, and legal or political. Most authors either defend the criterion as it is, propose some minor or major revisions, or advocate abandoning it and finding better solutions to the problems that brain death was intended to solve when it was introduced. In short, debates about brain death have been characterized by partisanship, for or against. Here I plead for a non-partisan approach that has been overlooked in the literature: the epistemological or philosophy of science approach. Some scholars claim that human death is a matter of fact, a biological phenomenon whose occurrence can be determined empirically, based on science. We should take this claim seriously, whether we agree with it or not. The question is: how do we know that human death is a scientific matter of fact? Taking the epistemological approach means, among other things, examining how the determination of human death became an object of scientific inquiry, exploring the nature of the brain death criterion itself, and analysing the meaning of its core concepts such as "irreversibility" and "functions".

Brain death debates: from bioethics to philosophy of science

50 years after its introduction, brain death remains controversial among scholars. The debates focus on one question: is brain death a good criterion for determining death? This question has been answered from various perspectives: medical, metaphysical, ethical, and legal or political. Most authors either defend the criterion as it is, propose some minor or major revisions, or advocate abandoning it and finding better solutions to the problems that brain death was intended to solve when it was introduced. Here I plead for a different approach that has been overlooked in the literature: the philosophy of science approach. Some scholars claim that human death is a matter of fact, a biological phenomenon whose occurrence can be determined empirically, based on science. We should take this claim seriously, whether we agree with it or not. The question is: how do we know that human death is a scientific matter of fact? Taking the philosophy of science approach means, among other things, examining how the determination of human death became an object of scientific inquiry, exploring the nature of the brain death criterion itself, and analysing the meaning of its core concepts such as "irreversibility" and "functions".

Heart Donation From Donors After Controlled Circulatory Death

The gold-standard therapy for advanced-stage heart failure is cardiac transplantation. Since the first heart transplant in 1967, the majority of hearts transplanted came from brain death donors. Nevertheless, in recent years, the option of donation after circulatory death (DCD) is gaining importance to increase donor pool. Currently, heart-transplant programs using controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD) have been implemented in the United Kingdom, Belgium, Australia, United States of America, and, recently, in Spain. In this article, we performed a concise review of the literature in heart cDCD; we summarize the pathophysiology involved in ischemia and reperfusion injury during this process, the different techniques of heart retrieval in cDCD donors, and the strategies that can be used to minimize the damage during retrieval and until transplantation. Heart transplant using DCD hearts is in continuous improvement and must be implemented in experienced cardiac transplant centers.

Maintaining the permanence principle for death during in situ normothermic regional perfusion for donation after circulatory death organ recovery: A United Kingdom and Canadian proposal

There is international variability in the determination of death. Death in donation after circulatory death (DCD) can be defined by the permanent cessation of brain circulation. Post-mortem interventions that restore brain perfusion should be prohibited as they invalidate the diagnosis of death. Retrieval teams should develop protocols that ensure the continued absence of brain perfusion during DCD organ recovery. In situ normothermic regional perfusion (NRP) or restarting the heart in the donor's body may interrupt the permanent cessation of brain perfusion because, theoretically, collateral circulations may restore it. We propose refinements to current protocols to monitor and exclude brain reperfusion during in situ NRP. In abdominal NRP, complete occlusion of the descending aorta prevents brain perfusion in most cases. Inserting a cannula in the ascending aorta identifies inadequate occlusion of the descending aorta or any collateral flow and diverts flow away from the brain. In thoracoabdominal NRP opening the aortic arch vessels to atmosphere allows collateral flow to be diverted away from the brain, maintaining the permanence standard for death and respecting the dead donor rule. We propose that these hypotheses are correct when using techniques that simultaneously occlude the descending aorta and open the aortic arch vessels to atmosphere.

New Strategies to Expand and Optimize Heart Donor Pool: Ex Vivo Heart Perfusion and Donation After Circulatory Death: A Review of Current Research and Future Trends

Heart transplantation remains the definitive management for end-stage heart failure refractory to medical therapy. While heart transplantation cases are increasing annually worldwide, there remains a deficiency in organ availability with significant patient mortality while on the waiting list. Attempts have therefore been made to expand the donor pool and improve access to available organs by recruiting donors who may not satisfy the standard criteria for organ donation because of donor pathology, anticipated organ ischemic time, or donation after circulatory death. "Ex vivo" heart perfusion (EVHP) is an emerging technique for the procurement of heart allografts. This technique provides mechanically supported warm circulation to a beating heart once removed from the donor and before implantation into the recipient. EVHP can be sustained for several hours, facilitate extended travel time, and enable administration of pharmacological agents to optimize cardiac recovery and function, as well as allow assessment of allograft function before implantation. In this article, we review recent advances in expanding the donor pool for cardiac transplantation. Current limitations of conventional donor criteria are outlined, including the determinants of organ suitability and assessment, involving transplantation of donation after circulatory death hearts, extended criteria donors, and EVHP-associated assessment, optimization, and transportation. Finally, ongoing research relating to organ optimization and functional ex vivo allograft assessment are reviewed.

Death, unity, and the brain

The dead donor rule holds that removing organs from living human beings without their consent is wrongful killing. The rule still prevails in most countries, and I assume it without argument in order to pose the question: is it possible to have a metaphysically correct, clinically relevant analysis of human death that makes organ donation ethically permissible? I argue that the two dominant criteria of death-brain death and circulatory death-are both empirically and metaphysically inadequate as definitions of human death and therefore hold no epistemic value in themselves. I first set out a neo-Aristotelian theory of death as separation of soul (understood as organising principle) and body, which is then fleshed out as loss of organismic integrity. The brain and circulatory criteria are shown to have severe weaknesses as physiological manifestations of loss of integrity. Given the mismatch between what death is, metaphysically speaking, and the dominant criteria accepted by clinicians and philosophers, it turns out that only actual bodily decomposition is a sure sign of death. In this I differ from Alan Shewmon, whose important work I discuss in detail.

Heart transplantation after the circulatory death; The ethical dilemma

Donors after brain death (DBD) have been the major source of organ donation due to good perfusion of the organs. However, owing to the mismatch in demand and supply of the organ donors and recipients, donors after circulatory death (DCDDs) has increased recently all over the world. Kidneys, liver, and lungs are being used for transplantation from DCDDs. Recently, heart transplantation from DCDDs has been started, which is under the firestorm of scrutiny by the ethicists. The ethical dilemma revolves around the question whether the donors are actually dead when they are declared dead by cardiocirculatory death criteria for organ procurement. The subsequent literature review addresses all the perspectives by differentiating between the donation methods known as DBDs and DCDDs, explaining the implications of the dead-donor rule on the organ donation pool, and categorizing the determinants of death leading to separation of the arguments under the two methods of donations.

Donation after circulatory death heart transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite continued expansion in the use of extended-criteria donor hearts following donation after brain death, there remains an unacceptable discrepancy between the supply of suitable donor hearts and the demand from increasing recipient numbers on transplant wait lists. Until recently, the additional approach of utilizing organs following donation after circulatory death (DCD) had not been possible for clinical heart transplantation in the modern era. This review describes relevant advances in translational research and provides an update on the favourable adoption of this donation pathway for clinical heart transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The use of an ex-situ transportable cardiac perfusion platform together with modified cardioplegia, supplemented with postconditioning agents, has allowed three centres to report successful transplantation of distantly procured human DCD hearts. This has been achieved by utilizing either a method of direct procurement and ex-situ perfusion on the device or through an initial in-situ reanimation with extracorporeal normothermic regional perfusion prior to ex-situ perfusion.

SUMMARY

DCD heart transplantation is feasible with excellent early outcomes. In the face of continued and significant donor organ shortage and inevitable wait list attrition, the rejection of suitable DCD hearts, in jurisdictions permitting this donation pathway, is increasingly difficult to justify.

Innovations in cardiac transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As the number of people living with heart failure continues to grow, future treatments will focus on efficient donor organ donation and ensuring safe and durable outcomes. This review will focus on organ procurement, graft surveillance and emerging therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preliminary studies into donation after cardiac death have indicated that this may be an effective means to increase the donor pool. Novel preservation techniques that include ex-vivo perfusion to improve donor metabolic stabilization prior to implantation may also expand the donor pool. Biomarkers, including circulating-free DNA, are emerging that could replace the endomyocardial biopsy for acute graft rejection, but we lack a risk predictive biomarker in heart transplantation. Novel immune suppressants are being investigated. Emerging therapeutics to reduce the development of chronic allograft vasculopathy are yet to be found.

SUMMARY

This review highlights the most recent studies and future possible therapies that will improve outcomes in cardiac transplantation. Larger clinical trials are currently taking place and will be needed in the future to develop and sustain current trends toward better survival rates with cardiac transplantation.

Donation after brain circulation determination of death

Background

The fundamental determinant of death in donation after circulatory determination of death is the cessation of brain circulation and function. We therefore propose the term donation after brain circulation determination of death [DBCDD].

Results

In DBCDD, death is determined when the cessation of circulatory function is permanent but before it is irreversible, consistent with medical standards of death determination outside the context of organ donation. Safeguards to prevent error include that: 1] the possibility of auto-resuscitation has elapsed; 2] no brain circulation may resume after the determination of death; 3] complete circulatory cessation is verified; and 4] the cessation of brain function is permanent and complete. Death should be determined by the confirmation of the cessation of systemic circulation; the use of brain death tests is invalid and unnecessary.

Because this concept differs from current standards, consensus should be sought among stakeholders. The patient or surrogate should provide informed consent for organ donation by understanding the basis of the declaration of death.

Conclusion

In cases of circulatory cessation, such as occurs in DBCDD, death can be defined as the permanent cessation of brain functions, determined by the permanent cessation of brain circulation.

Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death: A Systematic Ethical Analysis

Uncontrolled donation after circulatory determination of death (uDCDD) refers to organ donation after a refractory cardiac arrest. We analyzed ethical issues raised by the uDCDD protocols of France, Madrid, and New York City. We recommend: (1) Termination of resuscitation (TOR) guidelines need refinement, particularly the minimal duration of resuscitation efforts before considering TOR; (2) Before enrolling in an uDCDD protocol, physicians must ascertain that additional resuscitation efforts would be ineffective; (3) Inclusion in an uDCDD protocol should not be made in the outpatient setting to avoid error and conflicts of interest; (4) The patient's condition should be reassessed at the hospital and reversible causes treated; (5) A no-touch period of at least 10 minutes should be respected to avoid the risk of autoresuscitation; (6) Once death has been determined, no procedure that may resume brain circulation should be used, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation, artificial ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; (7) Specific consent is required prior to entry into an uDCDD protocol; (8) Family members should be informed about the goals, risks, and benefits of planned uDCDD procedures; and (9) Public information on uDCDD is desirable because it promotes public trust and confidence in the organ donation system.

Is heart transplantation after circulatory death compatible with the dead donor rule?

Dalle Ave et al (2016) provide a valuable overview of several protocols for heart transplantation after circulatory death. However, their analysis of the compatibility of heart donation after circulatory death (DCD) with the dead donor rule (DDR) is flawed. Their permanence-based criteria for death, which depart substantially from established law and bioethics, are ad hoc and unfounded. Furthermore, their analysis is self-defeating, because it undercuts the central motivation for DDR as both a legal and a moral constraint, rendering the DDR vacuous and trivial. Rather than devise new and ad hoc criteria for death for the purpose of rendering DCD nominally consistent with DDR, we contend that the best approach is to explicitly abandon DDR.