Tissue Donor

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
2009 ◽  
Vol 133 (12) ◽  
pp. 1923-1931 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Ann Sens ◽  
Xu Dong Zhou ◽  
Timothy Weiland ◽  
A. Marvin Cooley

Abstract Context.—Medical examiner cases are increasingly used as tissue donor referral sources to meet the ever-growing need for transplant tissues. The assumption is often made that traumatic and sudden deaths have minimal risk of unsuspected neoplasia. An autopsy of a registered tissue donor with strong preautopsy clinical assessment of a saddle pulmonary embolus revealed unsuspected acute lymphoblastic leukemia, prompting a review of the incidence of unsuspected neoplasia from a regional forensic autopsy practice. Objective.—To determine the incidence of (1) unsuspected neoplasia, (2) clinical concordance of known neoplasia, and (3) potential donor referral in a regional forensic autopsy service. Design.—A retrospective, 5-year review of 412 autopsies from a regional, primarily forensic, autopsy service to determine the incidence of unsuspected neoplasia, clinical concordance of known neoplasia, and the preautopsy assessment of potential donor referral suitability. Results.—Unsuspected neoplasia rate at autopsy was 7% (29 of 412 patients); cancer was the cause of death in 41% (12 of 29 patients) of these individuals. In patients with a history of cancer, the discordance of cancer diagnosis was 44% (4 of 9 patients [11 patients with known cancer, 2 who refused medical evaluation were excluded from the study]). Nearly 60% (17 of 29 patients) of the unsuspected cancer cases had no apparent reason for deferral of tissue procurement before the autopsy examination. Conclusions.—The 7% incidence of unsuspected cancer in a forensic autopsy practice raises concern for the potential introduction of neoplastic tissue in the donor pool. To ensure the safety of this vital resource, mandatory complete autopsies on deceased donors are advocated as well as a tissue-recipient registry to track donor-related neoplasia.


2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (9) ◽  
pp. 3027-3029
Author(s):  
Daniel Budoy ◽  
Camino Rodriguez-Villar ◽  
David Peña ◽  
Ferran Vizcaino ◽  
Sandra Saavedra ◽  
...  

CJEM ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (S1) ◽  
pp. S72-S72
Author(s):  
B. Ellis ◽  
J.J. Perry ◽  
M. Hartwick

Introduction: Our study objectives were to assess the acceptability of using the emergency department (ED) waiting room to provide knowledge on, and offer opportunities for organ and tissue donor registration; and to identify barriers to the donor registration process in Ontario. Methods: We conducted a paper based in-person survey over nine days for eight hour blocks in March and April 2017. The survey instrument was created in English using existing literature and expert opinion, pilot tested and then translated into French. The study collected data from patients and visitors in an urban academic Canadian tertiary care ED waiting room. All adults in the waiting room were approached to participate during the study periods. Individuals waiting in clinical care areas were excluded, as well as those who required immediate treatment. Results: The number of attempted surveys was 324; 67 individuals (20.7%) refused to partake. A total of 257 surveys were distributed and five were returned blank. This gave us a response rate of 77.8% with 252 completed surveys. The median age group was 51-60 years old with 55.9% female. Forty-six percent were Christian (46.0%) and 34.1% did not declare a religious affiliation. Nearly half of participants (44.1%) were registered organ donors. The majority of participants agreed or were neutral (83.3%) that the ED waiting room was an acceptable place to provide information on organ and tissue donation. Further, 82.1% agreed or were neutral that the ED was an acceptable place to register as an organ donor. Nearly half (47.2%) agreed that they would consider registering while in the ED waiting room. A number of barriers to registering as an organ and tissue donor were identified. The most common were: not knowing how to register (22.0%), a lack of time to register (21.1%), and having unanswered questions regarding organ and tissue donation (18.7%). Conclusion: Individuals waiting in the ED are supportive of using the ED waiting room for distributing information regarding organ and tissue donation, and facilitating organ and tissue donation registration. Developing such a practice could help to reduce some of the identified barriers, including a lack of time and having unanswered questions regarding donation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik J. Woods ◽  
Aubrey M. Sherry ◽  
John R. Woods ◽  
James W. Hardin ◽  
Michael LaFontaine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 425-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muriel M.L. Pimentel ◽  
Fernanda A. Santos ◽  
Ana C.G. Teixeira ◽  
Roberta G. Izzo ◽  
Mikael A. Lima ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT: This study aimed to evaluate the characteristics of two different murine models of hormone-treated renal-encapsulated bovine ovarian tissue xenotransplantation. Two immunodeficient mouse models (BALB/c Nude and C57BL6 SCID) were xenografted with ovarian pieces from heifers and each group was subjected to two hormonal treatments of eCG or a combination of FSH+LH. Donor ovaries and recipients were evaluated by histology and infrared thermography at different times. At the time of xenograft collection, animals were evaluated for alterations in hepatorenal biochemistry. The statistical test used in the study was ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s test. Among the strains, 80% of C57BL6 SCID and 77% of BALB/c Nude mice showed development and vascularization of the transplanted tissue, which acquired cyclicity at 19 and 9 days post-transplant, respectively. Hemorrhagic follicles in xenografts induced with FSH+LH were found in the C57BL6 SCID strain. Infrared thermography was insufficient to distinguish the tissue donor recipient. In conclusion, the C57BL6 SCID strain appears to be the best host for ovarian xenografts, since the transplants in these mice were viable and showed robust follicular development. This work will aid future choices of immunodeficient strains for xenografting procedures.


Author(s):  
Kim A. Collins ◽  
Dilhani Amarasinghe ◽  
Muditha Amarasinghe
Keyword(s):  

CJEM ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 622-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Ellis ◽  
Michael Hartwick ◽  
Jeffrey J. Perry

ABSTRACTObjectiveOur objectives were to identify barriers to the organ donation registration process in Ontario; and to determine the acceptability of using the emergency department (ED) waiting room to provide knowledge and offer opportunities for organ and tissue donor registration.MethodsWe conducted a paper based in-person survey over nine days in March and April 2017. The survey instrument was created in English using existing literature and expert opinion, pilot tested and then translated into French. Data was collected from patients and visitors in an urban academic Canadian tertiary care ED waiting room. All adults in the waiting room were approached to participate during study periods. We excluded patients who were too ill and required immediate treatment.ResultsThe number of attempted surveys was 324; 67 individuals (20.7%) declined participation. A total of 257 surveys were distributed and five were returned blank. This gave us a response rate of 77.8% with 252 completed surveys. The median age group was 51–60 years old with 55.9% female. Forty-six percent reported their religion as Christian and 34.1% did not declare a religious affiliation. 44.1% were already registered donors. Most participants agreed or were neutral that the ED waiting room was an acceptable place to provide information on donation, and for registration as an organ and tissue donor (83.3% and 82.1%, respectively).ConclusionsIndividuals waiting in the ED are generally supportive of using the waiting room for distributing information regarding organ and tissue donation, and to allow donor registration.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document