scholarly journals Managing a rare donor programme: the immunohaematology laboratory perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Paccapelo
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1098612X2110202
Author(s):  
Tiago AM Abreu ◽  
Andreia ST Oliveira ◽  
Rui RF Ferreira ◽  
Sandrina MV Correia ◽  
Mafalda SSQ Morais ◽  
...  

Objectives This article aims to analyse the safety of feline blood donation by describing the frequency and nature of any adverse reactions and their causes, as well as propose measures to decrease the incidence of adverse reactions. Methods In this prospective study, any blood donor adverse reactions detected by the clinical staff during and immediately after donation were recorded. The owners of the cats were also surveyed by a veterinary practitioner or veterinary nurse 5 days after donation, using a predefined questionnaire to assess for any clinical or behavioural changes. Data were collected between January 2019 and March 2020 from blood donors enrolled in an animal blood bank programme. Results Of 3690 blood donations from 1792 feline donors assessed, post-donation reactions were reported in 1.14% (n = 42): 0.22% (n = 8) were acute reactions, which included weakness, pallor, tachypnoea and open-mouth breathing; and 0.92% (n = 34) were delayed post-donation reactions, with 0.16% involving cutaneous (haematomas and skin rashes, n = 6), 0.68% involving behavioural (n = 25) and 0.08% involving digestive (emesis and inappetence, n = 3) signs. Conclusions and relevance The low incidence of post-donation reactions in this study is encouraging, suggesting that a well-established protocol and competent staff can help to ensure a high level of safety in a feline donor programme and, in turn, increase the confidence of cat owners.


2019 ◽  
Vol 67 ◽  
pp. 208-209
Author(s):  
Ivan Briody ◽  
Maria Dooley
Keyword(s):  

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. e75
Author(s):  
C. Cámara Moreno ◽  
A. Francés Comalat ◽  
M.J. Pérez Sáez ◽  
S. Henao Macaya ◽  
A. Zapatero Ferrándiz ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 121 (10) ◽  
pp. 932-937 ◽  
Author(s):  
A C Leong ◽  
C Aldren

Introduction: Temporal bone dissection is essential training for otological surgery. Organ retention scandals have made it difficult to obtain consent for cadaveric temporal bone removal. The current literature does not address the means of acquiring a steady supply of cadaveric temporal bones for medical education and training. The US national temporal bone registry has established a temporal bone donor bank for medical education and research. Could a similar programme in the UK be an answer to the paucity of temporal bones?Objectives: (1) To ascertain the degree of interest amongst our regional patient population in a ‘living will’ pledge for temporal bone donation for medical education and research. (2) To delineate a demographic profile of potential temporal bone donors.Design, setting and participants: One thousand questionnaires were distributed to patients and relatives attending out-patient clinics; 920 people responded.Results: Seventy per cent of respondents supported temporal bone donation for medical education and research. Potential temporal bone donors tended to be ENT clinic attenders, to suffer from hearing difficulties or to have had previous ear surgery (p<0.001). Strong support also came from non-ENT clinic attenders.Conclusions: There was strong support amongst our regional patient population for a ‘living will’ pledge for temporal bone donation for medical education and research. Based on our donor profile, we propose a temporal bone donor programme, starting on a regional basis with possible expansion nationwide. This programme would recruit donors from amongst patients attending ENT out-patient clinics, as a long term solution to improve the supply of temporal bones.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. e024473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Rogers ◽  
Matthew P Robertson ◽  
Angela Ballantyne ◽  
Brette Blakely ◽  
Ruby Catsanos ◽  
...  

ObjectivesThe objective of this study is to investigate whether papers reporting research on Chinese transplant recipients comply with international professional standards aimed at excluding publication of research that: (1) involves any biological material from executed prisoners; (2) lacks Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and (3) lacks consent of donors.DesignScoping review based on Arksey and O’Mallee’s methodological framework.Data sourcesMedline, Scopus and Embase were searched from January 2000 to April 2017.Eligibility criteriaWe included research papers published in peer-reviewed English-language journals reporting on outcomes of research involving recipients of transplanted hearts, livers or lungs in mainland China.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted by individual authors working independently following training and benchmarking. Descriptive statistics were compiled using Excel.Results445 included studies reported on outcomes of 85 477 transplants. 412 (92.5%) failed to report whether or not organs were sourced from executed prisoners; and 439 (99%) failed to report that organ sources gave consent for transplantation. In contrast, 324 (73%) reported approval from an IRB. Of the papers claiming that no prisoners’ organs were involved in the transplants, 19 of them involved 2688 transplants that took place prior to 2010, when there was no volunteer donor programme in China.DiscussionThe transplant research community has failed to implement ethical standards banning publication of research using material from executed prisoners. As a result, a large body of unethical research now exists, raising issues of complicity and moral hazard to the extent that the transplant community uses and benefits from the results of this research. We call for retraction of this literature pending investigation of individual papers.


2009 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. S-14
Author(s):  
E Velilla ◽  
A Colomar ◽  
S Fernández ◽  
E Toro ◽  
A Casanovas ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document