Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

Organ transplant

 
US History Encyclopedia: Transplants And Organ Donation

Transplantation (grafting) is the replacement of a failing organ or tissue by a functioning one. Transplantation was a dream in antiquity. The Hindu deity Ganesha had his head replaced by an elephant's head soon after birth (Rig-Veda, 1500 B.C.). In the Christian tradition Saints Cosmas and Damian (fl. 3rd century A.D.) are famous for replacing the diseased leg of a true believer with the leg of a dark-skinned Moor, thereby becoming the patron saints of physicians and surgeons.

Transplantation may be from the same person (autologous), from the same species (homologous—the allograft can come from a genetically identical twin, genetically close parent or sibling, living unrelated person, or cadaver) or from a different species (xenotransplant).

Human tissues carry highly specific antigens, which cause the immune system to react to "foreign" materials. An antigen is a substance that when introduced into an organism evokes the production of substances—antibodies—that destroy or neutralize the antigen. Grafts of a person's own tissue (such as skin grafts) are therefore well tolerated. Homologous grafts are plagued by attempted rejection by the recipient human. The biological acceptability of the graft is measured by tissue typing of the donor and recipient using the human leucocyte antigen, or HLA, panels. The closer the match between the donor and the recipient, the greater the chance of graft acceptance and function. Xenotransplantation is as yet entirely experimental because of tissue rejection and the possibility of transmitting animal diseases to the human recipient.

Organ transplantation has two sets of problems. The first relate to the recipient: the magnitude of the procedure and the intricacies of the surgical technique, the avoidance of rejection (acute or chronic) of the grafted tissue because of antigens in the tissue, and temporary and long-term suppression of the recipient's immune processes, with resulting infections and cancers. The second set of problems relates to the graft itself: the source of the graft and its collection, preservation, and transport to the recipient. Associated problems are ethical and economic, including the expense of the procedure and the cost of long-term monitoring and support of the patient.

Many of the technical problems associated with transplantation are gradually being overcome, and solutions are being constantly improved. Obtaining donor organs and distributing them equitably remain critical problems.

Transplantation is well established for skin, teeth, bone, blood, bone marrow, cornea, heart, kidney, liver, and to a lesser extent for the lung, pancreas, and intestines. On occasion two transplants are combined, such as heart and lungor pancreas and kidney.

Grafting an individual's own skin was well known to the ancient Hindus and has been widely used in the Western world since the middle of the nineteenth century. Skin grafting is a major resource in treating large wounds and burns. Artificially grown skin analogues and frozen pigskin can temporarily meet massive immediate needs.

Blood transfusion was attempted in the seventeenth century in France and England but was abandoned because of adverse reactions, including death. The identification of blood types in the early twentieth century and the discovery of methods of separating and preserving blood and its components have made transfusion a common and effective therapy. An important side effect of World War II and later conflicts has been improvement in all aspects of blood transfusion—collection, preservation, and delivery. The recognition of HLA types was based largely on the practices of blood transfusion and skin grafting. Transplantation of bone marrow and stem cells (precursors from which blood cells develop) is used to treat patients with malignancies of the blood and lymphatic system, such as the leukemia and lymphoma. Donor cells may be from the patient or from antigenmatched donor(s). Usually the patient's bone marrow (with the stem cells) is totally destroyed by chemotherapy, sometimes with whole body irradiation afterward. Donor cells are then introduced into the body, with the expectation that they will take over the production of new blood cells.

The commonest organ transplanted is the kidney. The first successful kidney transplant was done in 1954 in the United States between identical twins; before immunosuppressive procedures were developed, twins were the most successful donors. Transplantation between twins evokes the least immune reactions as the HLA types of twins are identical or nearly so. In 2001, about 14,000 kidney transplants were performed in the United States, 63 percent using kidneys obtained from cadavers. Patient survival using cadaveric donor kidneys is more than 90 percent at 1 year after surgery, and 60 to 90 percent at 5 years. For living donor kidneys, survival is above 98 percent at 1 year and 71 to 98 percent at 5 years. Corneal transplants have a high rate of success because the cornea does not have blood vessels and hence is not highly antigenic. Cadaver corneas can be successfully preserved and stored in eye banks for delivery as needed. More than 30,000 corneas are grafted each year in the United States.

More than 5,000 liver transplantations were done in the United States in 2001. Some of these transplants were portions of livers from living donors. In living adult liver donors, significant surgical complications and even a few deaths have raised some questions about the procedure. Though this is a controversial procedure, the great demand for donor livers will certainly keep this practice going. The heart is the fourth most common organ replaced. The first heart transplantation was done in South Africa in 1967; the high risk made it very controversial at the time. In 2000, almost 2,200 heart transplants were performed in the United States. Graft rejection remains a problem, and immunosuppresion (with its attendant dangers) has to be continued lifelong. If patients do not have other significant diseases, they return to near-normal functioning. More than 80 percent of patients function satisfactorily 1 year after surgery, and 60 to 70 percent at 5 years. At any given time, thousands of patients are waiting for donated organs. With progressive technical improvement in keeping seriously ill patients alive and making transplantation less risky, the need for organs continues to rise. Bioengineering is the application of engineering principles to biology—this includes the artificial production of cells and organs, or that of equipment that can perform functions of organs such as the kidneys or the heart. Bioengineered cells and tissues are a promising field in transplantation. Bioengineered skin is widely used for short-term coverage. Bioengineered corneas appear to be promising. Primitive heart-muscle cells (myoblasts) are being transplanted into diseased hearts, chondrocytes or cartilage cells are being cultured for use in degenerated joints, and there is considerable interest in xenografts.

Since 1968 a Uniform Anatomical Gift Act allows adults to donate their organs for transplantation after death. In every state, some form of donor card is associated with driver's licenses, and health care providers in most states are required to ask permission for postmortem organ procurement. (In some European countries consent for organ donation is presumed.) The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) was established in 1977 to coordinate the distribution of kidneys and later other organs nationally and to maintain a registry of persons awaiting transplant. The UNOS generally prefers that donated organ(s) be used in the local community. All transplant centers are required to join the network and abide by its rules. By May 2002, UNOS membership included 255 Transplant Centers, 156 Histocompatibility Laboratories, and 59 Operating Organ Procurement Organizations. With all these efforts, the shortage of organs persists.

Bibliography

Cooper, David K. C., and Robert P. Lanza. Xeno: The Promise of Transplanting Animal Organs into Humans. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Fox, Renée C., and Judith P. Swazey, with the assistance of Judith C. Watkins. Spare Parts: Organ Replacement in American Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Lock, Margaret M. Twice Dead: Organ Transplants and the Reinvention of Death. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002.

Munson, Ronald. Raising the Dead: Organ Transplants, Ethics, and Society. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Murray, Joseph E. Surgery of the Soul: Reflections on a Curious Career. Canton, Mass.: Science History Publications, 2001.

Parr, Elizabeth, and Janet Mize. Coping With an Organ Transplant: A Practical Guide to Understanding, Preparing For, and Living With an Organ Transplant. New York: Avery, 2001.

United States Congress, House Committee on Commerce. Organ and Bone Marrow Transplant Program Reauthorization Act of 1995: Report (to Accompany S. 1324). Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Printing Office, 1996.

United States Congress, House Committee on Commerce, Subcommittee on Health and the Environment. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network Amendments of 1999: Report Together with Dissenting Views (to Accompany H.R. 2418). Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Printing Office, 1999.

United States Congress, House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, Subcommittee on Human Resources. Oversight of the National Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. 105th Cong., 2nd sess., 8 April 1998. Washington, D.C.: General Printing Office, 1998.

Youngner, Stuart J., Renée C. Fox, and Laurence J. O'Connell, eds. Organ Transplantation: Meanings and Realities. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996.

Internet Sources
For current national statistical data, see the Web sites of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, http://ustransplant.org/annual.html, and the United Network for Organ Sharing, http://www.unos.org/frame_default.asp.

For general information for patients, updated regularly, see http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus.

Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Law Encyclopedia: Organ Transplantation
Top
This entry contains information applicable to United States law only.

The transfer of organs such as the kidneys, heart, or liver from one body to another.

The transplantation of human organs has become a common medical procedure. Typical organs transplanted include the kidneys, heart, liver, pancreas, cornea, skin, bones, and lungs. The organ most frequently transplanted is the cornea, followed by the kidney.

The first human organ transplants were performed in the early 1960s, when it became possible to use special tissue-matching techniques and immunosuppressive drugs that reduced the chance that a transplanted organ would be rejected by the host body. By the early 1980s, the new immunosuppressive drug cyclosporine led to great advances in the success rate of organ transplants.

Organ Shortages

As organ transplants have become increasingly successful, the most significant problem related to them has become the shortage of available organs. A large gap separates the high demand for organs and their scarce supply. Experts estimated that by the late 1980s, three people were on transplant waiting lists for every available organ. Given the grossly inadequate supply of organs, many vexing ethical, legal, and political issues surround the question of what is the best way to harvest or procure organs.

A number of laws have sought to address the problem of organ procurement. The Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (8A U.L.A. 15-16 [1983]), drafted in 1968 and adopted in all fifty states, allows any competent adult to state in writing, including by signing a donor card or checking off an item on a driver's license application, whether he wishes to allow or forbid the use of her or his organs after death. The act also permits next of kin to authorize donation. Such a program, termed encouraged voluntarism, relies on the free and autonomous choice of the individual or surviving family as the basis for organ donation.

Organ donation is also aided by brain-death statutes. These make it possible to declare as dead those who have lost whole-brain function but whose bodies are kept alive through artificial means. Such brain-dead persons become potential organ donors. In fact, most organs are obtained from accident victims.

The combination of encouraged voluntarism and brain-death statutes has not produced adequate numbers of organs. For example, a 1984 study estimated that of the 20,000 people each year who die of accidents or strokes and are medically suitable organ donors, only 3,000 served as donors. Experts have estimated that only three percent of those who serve as organ donors are actually carrying a donor card at the time they are pronounced dead.

A number of different problems contribute to this shortage of donated organs. Most people are fearful or uncomfortable with thoughts of death — particularly their own — and consequently do not contemplate organ donation. Others point out that some states have not yet enacted statutes that recognize brain death as the definition of death. Also, a general distrust of large, impersonal medical institutions keeps many people from committing to organ donation. Many people are afraid that if they carry an organ donor card, they will not receive adequate medical treatment in an emergency. Moreover, medical professionals are generally not required to present the option of organ donation to critically ill or injured patients and their families. As a result, even if a person has a donor card, it may go unnoticed.

When the system of encouraged voluntarism established by the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act failed to increase the number of available organs adequately, some individuals advocated establishing a legal market in organs. Some versions of an organ market would allow living individuals to sell one of their kidneys at a market price. More commonly, organ market advocates propose the sale of organs taken only from those who have died — that is, cadaveric organs — usually through "forward contracts" signed when the patient was living. However, the sale of organs has been barred by state and federal legislation, particularly the National Organ Transplant Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 274(e) [1985]), which states, "It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly acquire, receive or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation if the transfer affects interstate commerce." Rather than creating an organ market, Congress has since sought to establish laws that establish "required request" protocols. These protocols would require major hospitals to ask a patient's family if it wishes to donate the patient's organs (Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-509, 100 Stat. 1874, 2009).

Some states have gone a step further, passing "presumed consent" laws that allow for the removal of organs unless the next of kin objects or it is known that the potential donor objected to such a procedure while alive. Some of these laws allow only the removal of corneas under such conditions; others apply only to unclaimed dead bodies. The huge demand for organs may lead to the wider passage of presumed consent laws and the creation of market incentives for organ donation.

Controversial Issues

Organ transplants generate increasingly vexing legal and ethical questions as medical technology becomes more complex. Three controversial issues surrounding the subject are conception for organ donation, donor consent, and transplants from terminally disabled infants.

In some instances, a child is conceived expressly for the purpose of using her organs for transplantation in another person, usually a blood relative. In 1990, for example, a California couple gave birth to a child they had conceived solely in hopes that the baby's bone marrow cells would save the life of their teenage daughter, who was dying of cancer. Although the legality of such conceptions has not been challenged, the practice raises ethical questions relating to who may give informed consent for the donor child and whether such a practice may be considered child abuse.

The problem of donor consent has arisen in lawsuits seeking to compel persons to donate organs to relatives. For example, in 1990, an Illinois family with a son who had leukemia brought a lawsuit seeking to compel the boy's half sister and half brother to submit to preliminary medical tests that would have established their suitability to serve as bone marrow donors. A judge, noting the objections of the mother of the half siblings, ruled that such tests would be an invasion of the potential donors' right of privacy. The Illinois Supreme Court later upheld this ruling (Curran v. Bosze, No. 70501 [Ill. filed Dec. 20, 1990]). In its opinion, the court outlined three critical factors in determining the best interests of the donating child: (1) the consenting parent must know the inherent risks and benefits of the procedure, (2) the primary caretaker of the child must be able to provide emotional support, and (3) there must be an existing, close relationship between the donor and the recipient.

The issue of organ donations made by terminally disabled infants came to national attention in 1992 when a Florida couple sought to have the organs of their anencephalic baby, Theresa Ann Campo Pearson, donated for use by other newborns. Anencephaly is a rare and always fatal gestational disorder in which the brain develops a stem, or lower brain, but not a cortex, or upper brain. Though the rest of the anencephalic infant's body is healthy, the disorder causes the child to die soon after birth. Theresa Ann's mother and father sought to have her declared brain dead, but a judge stated that under Florida statutes, a declaration of brain death may be made only if activity in all parts of the brain has ceased (Fla. Stat. ch. 382.009 [1992]). The judge noted that Theresa Ann had lower-brain activity. She died ten days after birth, without having donated her organs.

Critics of this decision have argued that because anencephaly is always fatal, the organs of children with this disorder should be used to save other children. Supporters note that if an exception were made for anencephaly, other severely disabled persons may be inappropriately targeted as a source for organs. Others argue that the life of one child, no matter how brief or unsatisfactory, cannot be taken to save another.

See: death and dying; fetal rights.

WordNet: organ transplant
Top
Note: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words.

The noun has one meaning:

Meaning #1: an operation moving an organ from one person (the donor) to another (the recipient)
  Synonyms: transplant, transplantation


Wikipedia: Organ transplant
Top

Organ transplant is the moving of an organ from one body to another (or from a donor site on the patient's own body), for the purpose of replacing the recipient's damaged or failing organ with a working one from the donor site. Organ donors can be living or deceased (previously referred to as cadaveric). The emerging field of Regenerative medicine may soon[when?] allow organs to be re-grown from the patient's own cells (stem cells, or cells extracted from the failing organs.)

Organs that can be transplanted are the heart, kidneys, liver, lungs, pancreas, intestine, and skin. Tissues include bones, tendons, cornea, heart valves, veins, and arms. Worldwide, the kidneys are the most commonly transplanted organs.

Transplantation medicine is one of the most challenging and complex areas of modern medicine. Some of the key areas for medical management are the problems of transplant rejection, during which the body has an immune response to the transplanted organ, possibly leading to transplant failure and the need to immediately remove the organ from the recipient. When possible, transplant rejection can be reduced through serotyping to determine the most appropriate donor-recipient match and through the use of immunosuppressant drugs.[1]

In most countries there is a shortage of suitable organs for transplantation. Countries often have formal systems in place to manage the allocation and reduce the risk of rejection. Some countries are associated within international organisations like Eurotransplant in order to increase the supply of appropriate donor organs and the organ recipients.

Transplantation also raises a number of bioethical issues, including the definition of death, when and how consent should be given for an organ to be transplanted and payment for organs for transplantation.

Contents

United States

Acceptable organ donors can range in age from newborn to 65 years plus. People who are 65 years of age or older may be acceptable donors, particularly of corneas, skin, bone, for total body donation. An estimated 10,000 to 14,000 people who die each year meet the criteria for an organ donation, but less than half of that number becomes actual organ donors. Donor organs are matched to waiting recipients by a national computer registry, called the National Organ Procurement and Transplatation Network (OPTN). This computer registry is operated by an organization known as the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), which is located in Richmond, Virginia. Currently there are 58 organ procurement organizations (OPOs) across the country, which provide organ procurement services to some 261 transplant centers. All hospitals are required by law to have a "Required Referral" system in place. Under this system, the hospital must notify the local Organ Procurement Organization (OPO) of all patient deaths. If the OPO determines that organ and/or tissue donation is appropriate in a particular case, they will have a representative contact the deceased patient's family to offer them the option of donating their loved one's organs and tissues. By signing a Uniform Donor Card, an individual indicates his or her wish to be a donor. However, at the time of death, the person's next-of-kin will still be asked to sign a consent form for donation. It is important for people who wish to be organ and tissue donors to tell their family about this decision so that their wishes will be honored at the time of death. It is estimated that about 35 percent of potential donors never become donors because family members refuse to give consent.[2]

United Kingdom

In the UK the number of people needing organ transplants is significantly greater than the number of organs available. To ensure that the patients awaiting transplants are treated fairly, there is a UK-wide organ allocation system run by a body called NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), which is part of the UK’s National Health Service.[8]

All patients who are waiting for transplants are registered on the UK Transplant National Transplant Database.

Allocation is carried out on the patient's need and the importance of achieving the closest possible match between donor and recipient. The rules for allocating organs are determined by the medical profession in consultation with other health professionals, the Department of Health and the specialist advisory groups of NHSBT.

The blood group, age and size of the donor and recipient are all taken into account to ensure the best possible match for each patient. For kidney transplant patients, tissue type match is also a consideration. NHSBT to identify the best matched patient, or alternatively, the transplant unit to which the organ is to be offered.

Types of transplants

Autograft

Transplant of tissue to the same person. Sometimes this is done with surplus tissue, or tissue that can regenerate, or tissues more desperately needed elsewhere (examples include skin grafts, vein extraction for CABG, etc.) Sometimes an autograft is done to remove the tissue and then treat it or the person, before returning it (examples include stem cell autograft and storing blood in advance of surgery).

Allograft

An allograft is a transplant of an organ or tissue between two genetically non-identical members of the same species. Most human tissue and organ transplants are allografts. Due to the genetic difference between the organ and the recipient, the recipient's immune system will identify the organ as foreign and attempt to destroy it, causing transplant rejection. To prevent this, the organ recipient must take immunosuppressants. This dramatically affects the entire immune system, making the body vulnerable to pathogens.

Isograft

A subset of allografts in which organs or tissues are transplanted from a donor to a genetically identical recipient (such as an identical twin). Isografts are differentiated from other types of transplants because while they are anatomically identical to allografts, they don't trigger an immune response.

Xenograft and xenotransplantation

A transplant of organs or tissue from one species to another. An example are porcine heart valve transplants, which are quite common and successful. Another example is attempted piscine-primate (fish to non-human primate) transplant of islet (i.e. pancreatic or insular tissue) tissue. The latter research study was intended to pave the way for potential human use, if successful. However, xenotransplantion is often an extremely dangerous type of transplant because of the increased risk of non-compatibility, rejection, and disease carried in the tissue.

Split transplants

Sometimes a deceased-donor organ, usually a liver, may be divided between two recipients, especially an adult and a child. This is not usually a preferred option because the transplantation of a whole organ is more successful.

Domino transplants

This operation is usually performed on patients with cystic fibrosis because both lungs need to be replaced and it is a technically easier operation to replace the heart and lungs at the same time. As the recipient's native heart is usually healthy, it can be transplanted into someone else needing a heart transplant. That term is also used for a special form of liver transplant in which the recipient suffers from familial amyloidotic polyneuropathy, a disease where the liver slowly produces a protein that damages other organs. This patient's liver can be transplanted into an older patient who is likely to die from other causes before a problem arises.[3]

This term also refers to a series of living donor transplants in which one donor donates to the highest recipient on the waiting list and the transplant center utilizes that donation to facilitate multiple transplants. These other transplants are otherwise impossible due to blood-type or antibody barriers to transplantation. The "Good Samaritan" kidney is transplanted into one of the other recipients, whose donor in turn donates his or her kidney to an unrelated recipient. Depending on the patients on the waiting list, this has sometimes been repeated for up to six pairs, with the final donor donating to the patient at the top of the list. This method allows all organ recipients to get a transplant even if their living donor is not a match to them. This further benefits patients below any of these recipients on waiting lists, as they move closer to the top of the list for a deceased-donor organ. Johns Hopkins Medical Center in Baltimore and Northwestern University's Northwestern Memorial Hospital have received significant attention for pioneering transplants of this kind. [4][5]

Major organs and tissues transplanted

Thoracic organs

  • Heart (Deceased-donor only)
  • Lung (Deceased-donor and Living-Donor)
  • Heart/Lung (Deceased-donor and Domino transplant)

Abdominal organs

  • Kidney (Deceased-donor and Living-Donor)
  • Liver (Deceased-donor and Living-Donor)
  • Pancreas (Deceased-donor only)
  • Intestine (Deceased-donor and Living-Donor)
  • Stomach (Deceased-donor only)
  • Testis

Tissues, cells, fluids

History

Successful human allotransplants have a relatively long history; the operative skills were present long before the necessities for post-operative survival were discovered. Rejection and the side effects of preventing rejection (especially infection and nephropathy) were, are, and may always be the key problem.

Cosmas and Damian miraculously transplant the (black) leg of a Moor onto the (white) body of Justinian. Ditzingen, 16th century.

Several apocryphal accounts of transplants exist well prior to the scientific understanding and advancements that would be necessary for them to have actually occurred. The Chinese physician Pien Chi'ao reportedly exchanged hearts between a man of strong spirit but weak will with one of a man of weak spirit but strong will in an attempt to achieve balance in each man. Roman Catholic accounts report the third-century saints Damian and Cosmas as replacing the gangrenous leg of the Roman deacon Justinian with the leg of a recently deceased Ethiopian. Most accounts have the saints performing the transplant in the fourth century, decades after their deaths; some accounts have them only instructing living surgeons who performed the procedure.

The more likely accounts of early transplants deal with skin transplantation. The first reasonable account is of the Indian surgeon Sushruta in the second century BC, who used autografted skin transplantation in nose reconstruction rhinoplasty. Success or failure of these procedures is not well documented. Centuries later, the Italian surgeon Gasparo Tagliacozzi performed successful skin autografts; he also failed consistently with allografts, offering the first suggestion of rejection centuries before that mechanism could possibly be understood. He attributed it to the "force and power of individuality" in his 1596 work De Curtorum Chirurgia per Insitionem.

The first successful corneal allograft transplant was performed in 1837 in a gazelle model; the first successful human corneal transplant, a keratoplastic operation, was performed by Eduard Zirm in Olomouc, Czech Republic, in 1905. Pioneering work in the surgical technique of transplantation was made in the early 1900s by the French surgeon Alexis Carrel, with Charles Guthrie, with the transplantation of arteries or veins. Their skillful anastomosis operations, the new suturing techniques, laid the groundwork for later transplant surgery and won Carrel the 1912 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. From 1902 Carrel performed transplant experiments on dogs. Surgically successful in moving kidneys, hearts and spleens, he was one of the first to identify the problem of rejection, which remained insurmountable for decades.

Major steps in skin transplantation occurred during World War I, notably in the work of Harold Gillies at Aldershot. Among his advances was the tubed pedicle graft, maintaining a flesh connection from the donor site until the graft established its own blood flow. Gillies' assistant, Archibald McIndoe, carried on the work into World War II as reconstructive surgery. In 1962 the first successful replantation surgery was performed - re-attaching a severed limb and restoring (limited) function and feeling.

Transplant of a single gonad (testis) from a living donor was carried out in early July 1926 in Zaječar, Serbia, by a Russian emigré surgeon Dr. Peter Vasil'evič Kolesnikov. The donor was a convicted murderer, one Ilija Krajan, whose death sentence was commuted to 20 years imprisonment and he was led to believe that it was done because he had donated his testis to an elderly medical doctor. Both the donor and the receiver survived, but charges were brought in a court of law by the public prosecutor against Dr. Kolesnikov, not for performing the operation, but for lying to the donor. (v. Timočki medicinski glasnik, Vol.29 (2004) #2, p.115-117 ISSN 0350-2899 article in Serbian)

The first attempted human deceased-donor transplant was performed by the Ukrainian surgeon Yu Yu Voronoy in the 1930s; rejection resulted in failure. Joseph Murray performed the first successful transplant, a kidney transplant between identical twins, in 1954, successful because no immunosuppression was necessary in genetically identical twins.

In the late 1940s Peter Medawar, working for the National Institute for Medical Research, improved the understanding of rejection. Identifying the immune reactions in 1951 Medawar suggested that immunosuppressive drugs could be used. Cortisone had been recently discovered and the more effective azathioprine was identified in 1959, but it was not until the discovery of cyclosporine in 1970 that transplant surgery found a sufficiently powerful immunosuppressive.

Dr. Murray's success with the kidney led to attempts with other organs. There was a successful deceased-donor lung transplant into a lung cancer sufferer in June 1963 by James Hardy in Jackson, Mississippi. The patient survived for eighteen days before dying of kidney failure. Thomas Starzl of Denver attempted a liver transplant in the same year, but was not successful until 1967.

The heart was a major prize for transplant surgeons. But, as well as rejection issues the heart deteriorates within minutes of death so any operation would have to be performed at great speed. The development of the heart-lung machine was also needed. Lung pioneer James Hardy attempted a human heart transplant in 1964, but a premature failure of the recipient's heart caught Hardy with no human donor, he used a chimpanzee heart which failed very quickly. The first success was achieved December 3, 1967 by Christiaan Barnard in Cape Town, South Africa. Louis Washkansky, the recipient, survived for eighteen days amid what many saw as a distasteful publicity circus. The media interest prompted a spate of heart transplants. Over a hundred were performed in 1968-69, but almost all the patients died within sixty days. Barnard's second patient, Philip Blaiberg, lived for 19 months.

It was the advent of cyclosporine that altered transplants from research surgery to life-saving treatment. In 1968 surgical pioneer Denton Cooley performed seventeen transplants including the first heart-lung transplant. Fourteen of his patients were dead within six months. By 1984 two-thirds of all heart transplant patients survived for five years or more. With organ transplants becoming commonplace, limited only by donors, surgeons moved onto more risky fields, multiple organ transplants on humans and whole-body transplant research on animals. On March 9, 1981 the first successful heart-lung transplant took place at Stanford University Hospital. The head surgeon, Bruce Reitz, credited the patient's recovery to cyclosporine-A.

As the rising success rate of transplants and modern immunosuppression make transplants more common, the need for more organs has become critical. Advances in living-related donor transplants have made that increasingly common. Additionally, there is substantive research into xenotransplantation or transgenic organs; although these forms of transplant are not yet being used in humans, clinical trials involving the use of specific cell types have been conducted with promising results, such as using porcine islets of Langerhans to treat type one diabetes. However, there are still many problems that would need to be solved before they would be feasible options in patients requiring transplants.

Recently, researchers have been looking into steroid-free immunosuppression. This type of immunosuppression is being pioneered on a large scale at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois and other smaller institutions, while steroid minimization is being employed at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and other smaller institutions. This would avoid the side-effects of steroids. While short-term outcomes appear promising, long-term outcomes are still unknown.

In addition, calcineurin-Inhibitor-Free Immunosuppression is currently undergoing extensive trialing, the result of which would be to allow sufficient immunosuppression, without the nephrotoxicity associated with standard regimens that include calcineurin inhibitors. Positive results have yet to be demonstrated in any trial.

An FDA approved immune function test from Cylex has shown effectiveness in minimizing the risk of infection and rejection in post-transplant patients[8] by enabling doctors to tailor immunosuppressant drug regimens. By keeping a patient's immune function within a certain window, doctors can adjust drug levels to prevent organ rejection while avoiding infection. Such information could help physicians reduce the use of immunosuppressive drugs, lowering drug therapy expenses while reducing the morbidity associated with liver biopsies, improve the daily life of transplant patients, and could prolong the life of the transplanted organ. There is minimal evidence that this monitoring can be used with clinical benefit to patients.

Many other new drugs are under development for transplantation.[9]

The emerging field of Regenerative medicine promises to solve the problem of organ transplant rejection by regrowing organs in the lab, using the patients' own cells (stem cells, or healthy cells extracted from the donor site.)

At the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, in North Carolina, Dr. Anthony Atala and his colleagues have successfully extracted muscle and bladder cells from several patients' bodies, cultivated these cells in petri dishes, and then layered the cells in three-dimensional molds that resembled the shapes of the bladders. Within weeks, the cells in the molds began functioning as regular bladders which were then implanted back into the patients' bodies. [10] The team is currently working on re-growing over 22 other different organs including the Liver, Heart, Kidneys and Testicles. [11]

In June 2008, at the Hospital Clínic (Barcelona Metro), Professor Paolo Macchiarini and his team, of the University of Barcelona, performed the first tissue engineered trachea (wind pipe) transplantation. Adult stem cells were extracted from the patient's bone marrow, grown into a large population, and matured into cartilage cells, or chondrocytes, using an adaptive method originally devised for treating osteoarthritis. The team then seeded the newly grown chondrocytes, as well as epithileal cells, into a decellularised (free of donor cells) tracheal segment that was donated from a 51 year old transplant donor who had died of cerebral hemorrhage. After four days of seeding, the the graft was used to replace the patient's left main bronchus. After one month, a biopsy elicited local bleeding, indicating that the blood vessels had already grown back successfully.[12][13]

Timeline of successful transplants

  • 1905: First successful cornea transplant by Eduard Zirm[14]
  • 1954: First successful kidney transplant by Joseph Murray (Boston, U.S.A.)
  • 1966: First successful pancreas transplant by Richard Lillehei and William Kelly (Minnesota, U.S.A.)
  • 1967: First successful liver transplant by Thomas Starzl (Denver, U.S.A.)
  • 1967: First successful heart transplant by Christiaan Barnard (Cape Town, South Africa)
  • 1981: First successful heart/lung transplant by Bruce Reitz (Stanford, U.S.A.)
  • 1983: First successful lung lobe transplant by Joel Cooper (Toronto, Canada)
  • 1986: First successful double-lung transplant (Ann Harrison) by Joel Cooper (Toronto, Canada)
  • 1987: First successful whole lung transplant by Joel Cooper (St. Louis, U.S.A.)
  • 1995: First successful laparoscopic live-donor nephrectomy by Lloyd Ratner and Louis Kavoussi (Baltimore, U.S.A.)
  • 1998: First successful live-donor partial pancreas transplant by David Sutherland (Minnesota, U.S.A.)
  • 1998: First successful hand transplant (France)
  • 1999: First successful Tissue Engineered Bladder transplanted by Anthony Atala (Boston Children's Hospital, U.S.A.)[15]
  • 2005: First successful partial face transplant (France)
  • 2006: First jaw transplant to combine donor jaw with bone marrow from the patient, by Eric M. Genden (Mount Sinai Hospital, New York)[16]
  • 2008: First successful complete full double arm transplant by Edgar Biemer, Christoph Höhnke and Manfred Stangl (Technical University of Munich, Germany)[citation needed]
  • 2008: First baby born from transplanted ovary.[17]
  • 2008: First transplant of a human windpipe using a patient’s own stem cells, by Paolo Macchiarini (Barcelona, Spain)[18]

Types of donor

Living or deceased

In living donors, the donor remains alive and donates a renewable tissue, cell, or fluid (e.g. blood, skin); or donates an organ or part of an organ in which the remaining organ can regenerate or take on the workload of the rest of the organ (primarily single kidney donation, partial donation of liver, small bowel). Regenerative medicine may one day allow for laboratory-grown organs, using patient's own cells (stem cells, or healthy cells extracted from the failing organs.)

Deceased (formerly cadaveric) are donors who have been declared brain-dead and whose organs are kept viable by ventilators or other mechanical mechanisms until they can be excised for transplantation. Apart from brain-stem dead donors, who have formed the majority of deceased donors for the last twenty years, there is increasing use of Donation after Cardiac Death - DCD- Donors (formerly non-heart beating donors) to increase the potential pool of donors as demand for transplants continues to grow.[citation needed] These organs have inferior outcomes to organs from a brain-dead donor; however given the scarcity of suitable organs and the number of people who die waiting, any potentially suitable organ must be considered.[citation needed]

Reasons for donation and ethical issues

Living related donors

Living related donors donate to family members or friends in whom they have an emotional investment. The risk of surgery is offset by the psychological benefit of not losing someone related to them, or not seeing them suffer the ill effects of waiting on a list.

Paired-exchange

Diagram of an exchange between otherwise incompatible pairs.

A "paired-exchange" is a technique of matching willing living donors to compatible recipients using serotyping. For example a spouse may be more than willing to donate a kidney to their partner but cannot since there is not a biological match. The willing spouse's kidney is donated to a matching recipient who also has an incompatible but willing spouse. The second donor must match the first recipient to complete the pair exchange. Typically the surgeries are scheduled simultaneously in case one of the donors decides to back out and the couples are kept anonymous from each other until after the transplant.

Paired exchange programs were popularized in the New England Journal of Medicine article "Ethics of a paired-kidney-exchange program" in 1997 by L.F. Ross[9]. It was also proposed by Felix T. Rapport[10] in 1986 as part of his initial proposals for live-donor transplants "The case for a living emotionally related international kidney donor exchange registry" in Transplant Proceedings[11]. A paired exchange is the simplest case of a much larger exchange registry program where willing donors are matched with any number of compatible recipients[12]. Transplant exchange programs have been suggested as early as 1970: "A cooperative kidney typing and exchange program."[13].

The first pair exchange transplant in the U.S. was in 2001 at Johns Hopkins Hospital[14]. The first complex multihospital kidney exchange involving 12 patients was performed in February 2009 by The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Barnes-Jewish Hospital in St. Louis and Integris Baptist Medical Center in Oklahoma City.[19] Another 12-patient multihospital kidney exchange was performed four weeks later by Saint Barnabas Medical Center in Livingston, New Jersey, Newark Beth Israel Medical Center and New York-Presbyterian Hospital.[20] Surgical teams led by Johns Hopkins continue to pioneer in this field by having more complex chain of exchange such as eight-way multihospital kidney exchange.[21]

Paired-donor exchange, led by work in the New England Program for Kidney Exchange as well as at Johns Hopkins University and the Ohio OPOs may more efficiently allocate organs and lead to more transplants.

Good Samaritan

"Good Samaritan" or "altruistic" donation is giving a donation to someone not well-known to the donor. Some people choose to do this out of a need to donate. Some donate to the next person on the list; others use some method of choosing a recipient based on criteria important to them. Web sites are being developed that facilitate such donation. It has been featured in recent television journalism that over half of the members of the Jesus Christians, an Australian religious group, have donated kidneys in such a fashion.[22]

Compensated donation

In compensated donation, donors get money or other compensation in exchange for their organs. This practice is common in some parts of the world, whether legal or not, and is one of the many factors driving medical tourism.[23]

In the United States, The National Organ Transplant Act of 1984 made organ sales illegal. In the United Kingdom, the Human Tissue Act 1961 made organ sales illegal.

In 2007, two major European conferences recommended against the sale of organs[24].

Recent development of web sites and personal advertisements for organs among listed candidates has raised the stakes when it comes to the selling of organs, and have also sparked significant ethical debates over directed donation, "good-Samaritan" donation, and the current U.S. organ allocation policy. Bioethicist Jacob M. Appel has argued that organ solicitation on billboards and the internet may actually increase the overall supply of organs.[25]

Two books, Kidney for Sale By Owner by Mark Cherry (Georgetown University Press, 2005); and Stakes and Kidneys: Why markets in human body parts are morally imperative by James Stacey Taylor: (Ashgate Press, 2005); advocate using markets to increase the supply of organs available for transplantation. In a 2004 journal article Economist Alex Tabarrok argues that allowing organ sales, and elimination of organ donor lists will increase supply, lower costs and diminish social anxiety towards organ markets.[26]

In 2006, Iran became the only country to legally allow individuals to sell their kidneys, and the market price is of the order of US$2,000 to US$4,000. The Economist[15] and the Ayn Rand Institute[16] approved and advocated a legal market elsewhere. They argued that if 0.06% of Americans between 19 and 65 were to sell one kidney, the national waiting list would disappear (which, the Economist wrote, happened in Iran). The Economist argued that donating kidneys is no more risky than surrogate motherhood, which can be done legally for pay in most countries.

In Pakistan, 40 percent to 50 percent of the residents of some villages have only one kidney because they have sold the other for a transplant into a wealthy person, probably from another country, said Dr. Farhat Moazam of Pakistan, at a World Health Organization conference. Pakistani donors are offered $2,500 for a kidney but receive only about half of that because middlemen take so much[27]. In Chennai, southern India, poor fishermen and their families sold kidneys after their livelihoods were destroyed by the Indian Ocean tsunami in December 26, 2004. About 100 people, mostly women, sold their kidneys for 40,000-60,000 rupees ($900-$1,350)[28]. Thilakavathy Agatheesh, 30, who sold a kidney in May 2005 for 40,000 rupees said, "I used to earn some money selling fish but now the post-surgery stomach cramps prevent me from going to work." Most kidney sellers say that selling their kidney was a mistake[29].

Forced donation

There have been various accusations that certain authorities are harvesting organs from those the authorities deem undesirable, such as prison populations. The World Medical Association stated that individuals in detention are not in the position to give free consent to donate their organs [30]. Illegal dissection of corpses is a form of body-snatching and may have taken place to obtain allografts. [17]

According to the Chinese Deputy Minister of Health, Huang Jiefu, [31] approximately 95% of all organs used for transplantation are from executed prisoners. The lack of public organ donation program in China is used as a justification for this practice. However reports in Chinese media raised concerns if executed criminals are the only source for organs used in transplants.

In October 2007, bowing to international pressure, the Chinese Medical Association agreed on a moratorium of commercial organ harvesting from condemned prisoners, but did not specify a deadline. China agreed to restrict transplantations from donors to their immediate relatives.[32][33]

People in other parts of the world are responding to this availability of organs, and a number of individuals (including US and Japanese citizens) have elected to travel to China or India as medical tourists to receive organ transplants which may have been sourced in what might be considered elsewhere to be unethical ways (see later). [18] [19] [20].

Allocation of donated organs

The overwhelming majority of deceased-donor organs in the United States are allocated by federal contract to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), held since it was created by the Organ Transplant Act of 1984 by the United Network for Organ Sharing or UNOS. UNOS does not handle donor cornea tissue. Corneal donor tissue is usually handled by various eye banks. This allocates organs based on the method considered most fair by the scientific leadership in the field. For kidneys, for instance, that is by waiting time; for livers, it is by MELD (Model of End-Stage Liver Disease), an empirical score based on lab values indicative of the sickness of the patient from liver disease. Experiencing somewhat increased popularity, but still very rare, is directed or targeted donation, in which the family of a deceased donor (often honoring the wishes of the deceased) requests an organ be given to a specific person. If medically suitable, the allocation system is subverted, and the organ is given to that person. In the United States, there are various lengths of waiting due to the different availabilities of organs in different UNOS regions. In other countries such as the UK, only medical factors and the position on the waiting list can affect who receives the organ. If this is not the desired person, it is noted that this puts them higher on the list.

One of the more publicized cases of this type was the 1994 Chester and Patti Szuber transplant. This was the first time that a parent had received a heart donated by one of their own children. Although the decision to accept the heart from their recently killed child was not an easy decision, the Szuber family agreed that giving Patti’s heart to her father would have been something that she would have wanted.[34]

Access to organ transplantation is one reason for the growth of medical tourism.

Organ transplantation in different countries

Demographics

Despite efforts of international transplantation societies, it is not possible to access an accurate source on the number, rates and outcomes of all forms of transplantation globally; the best that we can achieve is estimations. This is not a sound basis for the future and thus one of the crucial strategies for the Global Alliance in Transplantation is to foster the collection and analysis of global data.

Transplantation of organs in different continents/regions year/ 2000

Kidney

(pmp*)

Liver

(pmp)

Heart

(pmp)

USA 52 19 8
Europe 27 10 4
Turkey 11 3.5 1
Asia 3 0.3 0.03
Latin America 13 1.6 0.5
  • All numbers per million population

Source: [21],[22]

According to the Council of Europe, Spain through the Spanish Transplant Organization led by Dr Rafael Matesanz shows the highest worldwide rate of 35.1.[35][36] donors per million population in 2005 and 33.8[37] in 2006.

In addition to the citizens waiting for organ transplants in the US and other developed nations, there are long waiting lists in the rest of the world. More than 2 million people need organ transplants in China, 50,000 waiting in Latin America (90% of which are waiting for kidneys), as well as thousands more in the less documented continent of Africa. Donor bases vary in developing nations.

Traditionally, Muslims believe body desecration in life or death to be forbidden, and thus many reject organ transplant. [38] However most Muslim authorities nowadays accept the practice if another life will be saved. [39]

In Latin America the donor rate is 40-100 per million per year, similar to that of developed countries. However, in Uruguay, Cuba, and Chile, 90% of organ transplants came from cadaveric donors. Cadaveric donors represent 35% of donors in Saudi Arabia. There is continuous effort to increase the utilization of cadaveric donors in Asia, however the popularity of living, single kidney donors in India yields India a cadaveric donor prevalence of less than 1 pmp.

China does 10,000 transplants a year, with sources claiming up to 90% of organs are taken from executed prisoners, without signed consent, since Chinese have taboos against donating organs of deceased family members.[40][41] Amnesty International has criticized this practice, and accused the Chinese of executing people without fair trials.[42] Close relative donations represent only 2% of transplants[citation needed].

In Israel, there is a severe organ shortage due to religious objections by some rabbis who oppose all organ donations and others who advocate that a rabbi participate in all decision making regarding a particular donor. This shortage has resulted in one-third of all heart transplants performed on Israelis being done in the Peoples' Republic of China; others are done in Europe. Dr. Jacob Lavee, head of the heart-transplant unit, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Aviv, believes that "transplant tourism" is unethical and Israeli insurers should not pay for it.[40] The organization HODS (Halachic Organ Donor Society) is working to increase knowledge and participation in organ donation among Jews throughout the world.[43]

Comparative costs

One of the driving forces for illegal organ trafficking and “transplantation tourism” is the price differences for organs and transplant surgeries in different areas of the world. According to the New England Journal of Medicine, a human kidney can be purchased in Manila for $1000- $2000, but in urban Latin America a kidney may cost more than $10,000. Kidneys in South Africa have sold for as high as $20,000. Price disparities based on donor race are a driving force of attractive organ sales in South Africa, as well as in other parts of the world.

In China, a kidney transplant operation runs for around $70,000, liver for $160,000, and heart for $120,000 [23]. Although these prices are still unattainable to the poor, compared to the fees of the United States, where a kidney transplant may demand $100,000, a liver $250,000, and a heart $860,000, Chinese prices have made China a major provider of organs and transplantation surgeries to other countries.

Safety

Compensation for donors also increases the risk of introducing diseased organs to recipients because these donors often yield from poorer populations unable to receive health care regularly and organ dealers may evade disease screening processes. The majority of such deals include one major payment and no follow up care for the donor. Some cases argue that there is a possibility of 1:18 to acquire HIV from such transplants.[citation needed]

In November 2007, the CDC reported the first-ever case of HIV and Hepatitis C being simultaneously transferred through an organ transplant. The donor was a 38-year-old male, considered "high-risk" by donation organizations, and his organs transmitted HIV and Hepatitis C to four organ recipients, none of whom had been told he was "high-risk." Experts say that the reason the diseases didn't show up on screening tests is probably because they were contracted within three weeks before the donor's death, so antibodies wouldn't have existed in high enough numbers to detect. The crisis has caused many to call for more sensitive screening tests, which could pick up antibodies sooner. Currently, the screens cannot pick up on the small number of antibodies produced in HIV infections within the last 90 days or Hepatitis C infections within the last 18-21 days before a donation is made.

NAT (nucleic acid testing) is now being done by many organ procurement organizations and is able to detect antibodies for HIV and Hepatitis C within seven to ten days of exposure to the virus.

Organ transplant laws

Both developing and developed countries have forged various policies to try to increase the safety and availability of organ transplants to their citizens. Brazil, France, Italy, Poland and Spain have ruled all adults potential donors with the “opting out” policy, unless they attain cards specifying not to be. Iran is the only country in the world where it is lawful for one citizen to sell an organ to another for transplantation.[citation needed] However, whilst potential recipients in developing countries may mirror their more developed counterparts in desperation, potential donors in developing countries do not. The Indian government has had difficulty tracking the flourishing organ black market in their country and have yet to officially condemn it. Other countries victimized by illegal organ trade have implemented legislative reactions. Moldova has made international adoption illegal in fear of organ traffickers. China has made selling of organs illegal as of July 2006 and claims that all prisoner organ donors have filed consent. However, doctors in other countries, such as the United Kingdom, have accused China of abusing its high capital punishment rate. Despite these efforts, illegal organ trafficking continues to thrive and can be attributed to corruption in healthcare systems, which has been traced as high up as the doctors themselves in China, Ukraine, and India, and the blind eye economically strained governments and health care programs must sometimes turn to organ trafficking. Some organs are also shipped to Uganda and the Netherlands. This was a main product in the triangular trade in 1934.

Starting on May 1, 2007, doctors involved in commercial trade of organs will face fines and suspensions in China. Only a few certified hospitals will be allowed to perform organ transplants in order to curb illegal transplants. Harvesting organs without donor's consent was also deemed a crime.[44]

On June 27, 2008, Indonesian, Sulaiman Damanik, 26, pleaded guilty in Singapore court for sale of his kidney to CK Tang's executive chair, Mr Tang Wee Sung, 55, for 150 million rupiah (S$ 22,200). The Transplant Ethics Committee must approve living donor kidney transplants. Organ trading is banned in Singapore and in many other countries to prevent the exploitation of "poor and socially disadvantaged donors who are unable to make informed choices and suffer potential medical risks." Toni, 27, the other accused, donated a kidney to an Indonesian patient in March, alleging he was the patient's adopted son, and was paid 186 million rupiah (20,200 US). Upon sentence, both would suffer each, 12 months in jail or 10,000 Singapore dollars (7,300 US) fine.[45][46]

In an article appearing in the Econ Journal Watch, April 2004.[47] Economist Alex Tabarrok examined the impact of direct consent laws on transplant organ availability. Tabarrok found that social pressures resisting the use of transplant organs decreased over time as the opportunity of individual decisions increased. Tabarrok concluded his study suggesting that gradual elimination of organ donation restrictions and move to a free market in organ sales will increase supply of organs and encourage broader social acceptance of organ donation as a practice.

Ethical concerns

The existence and distribution of organ transplantation procedures in developing countries, while almost always beneficial to those receiving them, raise many ethical concerns. Both the source and method of obtaining the organ to transplant are major ethical issues to consider, as well as the notion of distributive justice. The World Health Organization argues that transplantations promote health, but the notion of “transplantation tourism” has the potential to violate human rights or exploit the poor, to have unintended health consequences, and to provide unequal access to services, all of which ultimately may cause harm. Regardless of the “gift of life”, in the context of developing countries, this might be coercive. The practice of coercion could be considered exploitative of the poor population, violating basic human rights according to Articles 3 and 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is also a powerful opposing view, that trade in organs, if properly and effectively regulated to ensure that the seller is fully informed of all the consequences of donation, is a mutually beneficial transaction between two consenting adults, and that prohibiting it would itself be a violation of Articles 3 and 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Even within developed countries there is concern that enthusiasm for increasing the supply of organs may trample on respect for the right to life. The question is made even more complicated by the fact that the "irreversibility" criterion for legal death cannot be adequately defined and can easily change with changing technology [48].


See also

References

  1. ^ Christoph Frohn, Lutz Fricke, Jan-Christoph Puchta, and Holger Kirchner. The effect of HLA-C matching on acute renal transplant rejection. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 16: 355-360. http://ndt.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/16/2/355
  2. ^ 25 Facts About Organ Donation and Transplant.
  3. ^ Mayo Clinic Link
  4. ^ Seattle Times Article on domino transplants at Johns Hopkins
  5. ^ Good Morning America Video on four-way domino 47674874 transplant at Northwestern Memorial Hospital
  6. ^ Clint Hallam
  7. ^ Eduard Zirm
  8. ^ Cylex's Immune Function Test, ImmuKnow(R), Identifies Optimal Immune Status For Post-Transplant Therapy
  9. ^ NEW DRUGS in TRANSPLANTATION, EBMT Meeting, France, March 2007 C. PAILLET, Pharmacist, Pharm D. C. RENZULLO, Pharmacist, Pharm D. Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, FRANCE
  10. ^ Stephanie Smith, April 5, 2006
  11. ^ Wake Forest University Institute for Regenerative Medicine
  12. ^ [1]
  13. ^ [2]
  14. ^ Restore Sight Organization website
  15. ^ Wake Forest Physician Reports First Human Recipients of Laboratory Grown Organs
  16. ^ Daily News - "Jaw-Droppin' Op a Success"
  17. ^ Woman to give birth after first ovary transplant pregnancy by James Randerson, science correspondent. guardian.co.uk, Sunday November 9 2008 12.52 GMT.
  18. ^ Macchiarini, Paolo; et al. (2008). "Clinical transplantation of a tissue-engineered airway". The Lancet Forthcoming: 2023. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61598-6. 
  19. ^ JOHNS HOPKINS LEADS FIRST 12-PATIENT, MULTICENTER “DOMINO DONOR” KIDNEY TRANSPLANT, Johns Hopkins Medicine, February 16, 2009 - accessed July 14, 2009
  20. ^ Kidney donations connect strangers in Chain of Life forged by transplants, The Star-Ledger, June 05, 2009 - accessed July 11, 2009
  21. ^ First 16-patient, Multicenter 'Domino Donor' Kidney Transplant, Science Daily, July 11, 2009 - accessed July 14, 2009
  22. ^ "Would you give your kidney to a stranger?". CNN.com. 2006-06-05. http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/06/01/living.donors/index.html. Retrieved 2008-05-02. 
  23. ^ Budiani-Saberi, Da; Delmonico, Fl (May 2008), "Organ trafficking and transplant tourism: a commentary on the global realities.", American journal of transplantation 8 (5): 925–9, doi:10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02200.x, ISSN 1600-6135, PMID 18416734 
  24. ^ [3]Shopped Liver: The worldwide market in human organs, By William Saletan, Salon, April 14, 2007. Many links.
  25. ^ Appel, Jacob M. Organ Solicitation on the Internet: Every Man for Himself? Hastings Center Report 35(3):14–15. 2005.
  26. ^ http://www.econjournalwatch.org/pdf/Tabarrok%20Comment%20April%202004.pdf
  27. ^ [4]WHO Says Organ Demand Outstrips Supply, Alexander G. Higgins, Associated Press, March 30, 2007
  28. ^ R. Bhagwan Singh (2007-01-16). "Indian police probe kidney sales by tsunami victims". Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSDEL21432720070116. Retrieved 2008-08-09. 
  29. ^ Ethical and social consequences of selling a kidney, Rothman DJ, JAMA. 2002 Oct 2;288(13):1640-1. [PMID 12350195]
  30. ^ WMA - Policy : Council Resolution on Organ Donation in China
  31. ^ 世界日報──大陸新聞
  32. ^ Pact to block harvesting of inmate organs, Pg 1, South China Morning Post, October 7, 2007
  33. ^ Press release, Chinese Medical Association Reaches Agreement With World Medical Association Against Transplantation Of Prisoners's Organs, Medical News Today, Oct 07 2007
  34. ^ "Saved By His Daughter's Heart. Man Dying From Heart Disease Gets Gift From Late Daughter". CBS Broadcasting Inc. August 20, 2004. http://election.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/08/19/earlyshow/living/main637069.shtml. Retrieved October 10 2006. 
  35. ^ Council of EuropeDecesased Organ Donors, Anual Rate (p. m. p.) Europe Pag. 4
  36. ^ Organización Nacional de Transplantes, Donantes de órganos en España. Número total y tasa anual (p. m. p.)
  37. ^ Transplant Commission of the Council of Europe, La ONT estima en 94.500 los transplantes de órganos solidos realizados en 2006 en todo el mundo, 28 August 2007.
  38. ^ http://www.ramadhanfoundation.com/organ.htm
  39. ^ [5] "These institutes all call upon Muslims to donate organs for transplantation:the Shariah Academy of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (representing all Muslim countries), the Grand Ulema Council of Saudi Arabia, the Iranian Religious Authority, the Al-Azhar Academy of Egypt "
  40. ^ a b [6]Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2007, Change of heart: China reconsiders fairness of 'Transplant Tourism'; foreigners pay more for scarce organs; Israelis debate reform, Andrew Batson and Shai Oster.
  41. ^ [7]China admits taking executed prisoners' organs; Demand is high, and supply is low -- except on death row; the nation leads worldwide in capital punishment. By Mark Magnier and Alan Zarembo. Los Angeles Times, November 18, 2006
  42. ^ Amnesty International
  43. ^ Frequently Asked Questions about the Halachic Organ Donor (HOD) Society
  44. ^ "China issues new rules on organs". BBC. 2007-04-07. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6534363.stm. Retrieved 2007-04-07. 
  45. ^ Abs-Cbn Interactive, Two Indonesians plead guilty in Singapore midorgan trading case
  46. ^ straitstimes.com, CK Tang boss quizzed by police
  47. ^ http://www.econjournalwatch.org/pdf/Tabarrok%20Comment%20April%202004.pdf
  48. ^ Whetstine L, Streat S, Darwin M, Crippen D. (2005). "Pro/con ethics debate: when is dead really dead?". Critical Care (London, England) 9 (6): 538–42. doi:10.1186/cc3894. PMID 16356234. 

Sources and bibliography

  • Appel, Jacob M. and Fox, Mark D. (2005) Organ Solicitation on the Internet: Every Man for Himself? Hastings Center Report 35(3):14–15.
  • Lock, M. (2002) Twice Dead: Organ Transplants and the Reinvention of Death. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-22605-4.
  • Morris, PJ. Transplantation — A Medical Miracle of the 20th Century. N Engl J Med 2004;351:2678-80. PMID 15616201.
  • Finn, R. (2000). Organ Transplants: Making the Most of Your Gift of Life. Sebastopol: O'Reilly & Associates. ISBN 1-56592-634-X.
  • Hu, W (2006) A Preliminary Report of Penile Transplantation. Urology Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  • Taylor, James Stacey (2005) Stakes And Kidneys: Why Markets In Human Body Parts Are Morally Imperative. Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 0754641090.
  • Köchler, Hans, ed. (2001). Transplantationsmedizin und personale Identität. Medizinische, ethische, rechtliche und theologische Aspekte der Organverpflanzung. (Transplantation Medicine and Personal Identity. Medical, Ethical, Legal and Theological Aspects of Organ Transplantation / German) Frankfurt a. M. etc.: Peter Lang. ISBN 3-631-38363-0
  • Cherry, Mark J. (2005). Kidney For Sale By Owner: Human Organs, Transplantation, And The Market. Georgetown University Press. ISBN 158901040X.

External links


 
 

 

Copyrights:

US History Encyclopedia. © 2006 through a partnership of Answers Corporation. All rights reserved.  Read more
Law Encyclopedia. West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Copyright © 1998 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
WordNet. WordNet 1.7.1 Copyright © 2001 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Organ transplant" Read more