Hanna, Afif

AbstractBackgroundSignificant numbers of patients in the USA and UK die while waiting for solid organ transplant. Only 1–2% of deaths are eligible as donors with a fraction of the deceased donating organs. The form of consent to donation may affect the organs available. Forms of consent include: opt‐in, mandated choice, opt‐out, and organ conscription. Opt‐in and opt‐out are commonly practiced. A systematic review was conducted to determine the effect of opt‐in versus opt‐out consent on the deceased donation rate (DDR) and deceased transplantation rate (DTR).MethodsLiterature searches of PubMed and EMBASE between 2006 and 2016 were performed. Research studies were selected based on certain inclusion criteria which include USA, UK, and Spain; compare opt‐in versus opt‐out; primary data analysis; and reported DDR or DTR. Modeled effect on US transplant activity was conducted using public data from Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and Centers for Disease Control WONDER from 2006 to 2015.ResultsA total of 2400 studies were screened and six studies were included. Four studies reported opt‐out consent increases DDR by 21–76% over 5–14 years. These studies compared 13–25 opt‐out countries versus 9–23 opt‐in countries. Three studies reported opt‐out consent increases DTR by 38–83% over 11–13 years. These studies compared 22–25 opt‐out versus 22–28 opt‐in countries. Modeled opt‐out activity on the USA resulted in 4753–17,201 additional transplants annually.ConclusionOpt‐out consent increases DDR and DTR and may be useful in decreasing deaths on the waiting list in the USA and other countries.Registration numberPROSPERO CRD42019098759.

Purpose. Review the safety and long-term success with portosystemic shunts in children at a single institution. Methods. An IRB-approved, retrospective chart review of all children ages 19 and undergoing surgical portosystemic shunt from January 1990–September 2008. Results. Ten patients were identified, 8 females and 2 males, with a mean age of 15 years (range 5–19 years). Primary diagnoses were congenital hepatic fibrosis (5), hepatic vein thrombosis (2), portal vein thrombosis (2), and cystic fibrosis (1). Primary indications were repeated variceal bleeding (6), symptomatic hypersplenism (2), and significant liver dysfunction (2). Procedures performed were distal splenorenal bypass (4), side-to-side portocaval shunt (3), proximal splenorenal shunt (2), and an interposition H-graft portocaval shunt (1). There was no perioperative mortality and only minor morbidity. Seventy percent of patients had improvement of their symptoms. Eighty percent of shunts remained patent. Two were occluded at a median follow-up of 50 months (range 0.5–13.16 years). Two patients underwent subsequent liver transplantation. Two patients died at 0.5 and 12.8 years postoperatively, one from multisystem failure with cystic fibrosis and one from post-operative transplant complications. Conclusions. The need for portosystemic shunts in children is rare. However, in the era of liver transplantation, portosystemic shunts in selected patients with well-preserved liver function remains important. We conclude that portosystemic shunts are safe and efficacious in the control of variceal hemorrhage and symptoms related to hypersplenism.