Non-heart-beating donation: Ten evidence-based ethical recommendations

The renewed interest in non-heart-beating donation (NHBD) in the past decade has resulted in renewed examination of the concept and meaning of death; of the nature of consent; of the propriety of interventions for the benefit of the recipient and not the donor; of potential conflicts of interest; and of defining futility. There is recognition of the need to maintain public trust. Recent experience indicates that NHBD could make a significant contribution to total renal transplant numbers. While there is graft dysfunction in the short term, the long-term results are comparable to those of transplants from heart-beating kidney donors, and in one series, even to living donors. The University of Zurich's experience indicates that waiting 10 minutes after asystole and not using in situ cooling do not adversely affect long-term outcomes. NHBD under ideal conditions could be extended to other organs such as the liver and pancreas. Ethical concerns are not insurmountable and can be minimized if cooling procedures and the use of drugs, such as heparin and phentolamine, is minimized, and if a period of 10 minutes is allowed to elapse after asystole before death is declared. We make a series of evidence-based recommendations for protocol development.