Regional ethics of surgeon resuscitation for organ transplantation after lethal injury.
Journal
Surgery
ISSN: 1532-7361
Titre abrégé: Surgery
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0417347
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2021
06 2021
Historique:
received:
21
09
2020
revised:
04
11
2020
accepted:
23
11
2020
pubmed:
14
1
2021
medline:
28
7
2021
entrez:
13
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Trauma patients may present with nonsurvivable injuries, which could be resuscitated for future organ transplantation. Trauma surgeons face an ethical dilemma of deciding whether, when, and how to resuscitate a patient who will not directly benefit from it. As there are no established guidelines to follow, we aimed to describe resuscitation practices for organ transplantation; we hypothesized that resuscitation practices vary regionally. Over a 3-month period, we surveyed trauma surgeons practicing in Levels I and II trauma centers within a single state using an instrument to measure resuscitation attitudes and practices for organ preservation. Descriptive statistics were calculated for practice patterns. The survey response rate was 51% (31/60). Many (81%) had experience with resuscitations where the primary goal was to preserve potential for organ transplantation. Many (90%) said they encountered this dilemma at least monthly. All respondents were willing to intubate; most were willing to start vasopressors (94%) and to transfuse blood (84%) (range, 1 unit to >10 units). Of respondents, 29% would resuscitate for ≥24 hours, and 6% would perform a resuscitative thoracotomy. Respect for patients' dying process and future organ quality were the factors most frequently considered very important or important when deciding to stop or forgo resuscitation, followed closely by concerns about excessive resource use. Trauma surgeons' regional resuscitation practices vary widely for this patient population. This variation implies a lack of professional consensus regarding initiation and extent of resuscitations in this setting. These data suggest this is a common clinical challenge, which would benefit from further study to determine national variability, areas of equipoise, and features amenable to practice guidelines.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Trauma patients may present with nonsurvivable injuries, which could be resuscitated for future organ transplantation. Trauma surgeons face an ethical dilemma of deciding whether, when, and how to resuscitate a patient who will not directly benefit from it. As there are no established guidelines to follow, we aimed to describe resuscitation practices for organ transplantation; we hypothesized that resuscitation practices vary regionally.
METHOD
Over a 3-month period, we surveyed trauma surgeons practicing in Levels I and II trauma centers within a single state using an instrument to measure resuscitation attitudes and practices for organ preservation. Descriptive statistics were calculated for practice patterns.
RESULTS
The survey response rate was 51% (31/60). Many (81%) had experience with resuscitations where the primary goal was to preserve potential for organ transplantation. Many (90%) said they encountered this dilemma at least monthly. All respondents were willing to intubate; most were willing to start vasopressors (94%) and to transfuse blood (84%) (range, 1 unit to >10 units). Of respondents, 29% would resuscitate for ≥24 hours, and 6% would perform a resuscitative thoracotomy. Respect for patients' dying process and future organ quality were the factors most frequently considered very important or important when deciding to stop or forgo resuscitation, followed closely by concerns about excessive resource use.
CONCLUSION
Trauma surgeons' regional resuscitation practices vary widely for this patient population. This variation implies a lack of professional consensus regarding initiation and extent of resuscitations in this setting. These data suggest this is a common clinical challenge, which would benefit from further study to determine national variability, areas of equipoise, and features amenable to practice guidelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33436273
pii: S0039-6060(20)30822-9
doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.11.037
pmc: PMC8631573
mid: NIHMS1755127
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1532-1535Subventions
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR000445
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 GM120484
Pays : United States
Organisme : RRD VA
ID : I01 RX002992
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR002243
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : R01 AG058639
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Resuscitation. 2010 Jul;81(7):804-9
pubmed: 20378236
Am J Law Med. 1992;18(1-2):15-36
pubmed: 1621702
J Am Coll Surg. 2012 Aug;215(2):186-92
pubmed: 22626913
Ann Emerg Med. 2012 Oct;60(4):492-4
pubmed: 22699017
AMA J Ethics. 2018 May 1;20(5):447-454
pubmed: 29763391
J Am Coll Surg. 2010 Oct;211(4):450-5
pubmed: 20729100
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013 Jun;145(6):1617-26
pubmed: 22982033