Donation after circulatory death: a national survey of current practice in England in 2012.

OBJECTIVE: In recent years, England has seen renewed interest in donation after circulatory death. Many national and local initiatives have been implemented to encourage and support donation after circulatory death. To assess whether practice is in line with published guidance, we conducted a national survey with regard to current donation after circulatory death practices, local guidelines, and views on the need to further develop a national standardized protocol for donation after circulatory death.

DESIGN: Online survey.

SUBJECTS: Lead physicians for intensive care or organ donation for every acute National Health Service trust in England delivering adult care between April and June 2012.

INTERVENTIONS: Physicians were e-mailed a link to a structured online questionnaire regarding their experience and practice of donation after circulatory death, including local protocols, use of organ optimization, and the need for a national protocol.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We received replies from 119 of 156 eligible trusts (76.3%) in England. Of these, 112 trusts (94%) have performed donation after circulatory death. Ninety-three trusts (78.1%) have a local donation after circulatory death protocol, and 89 trusts (74.7%) felt there should be a national donation after circulatory death protocol. All responding transplant centers had performed donation after circulatory death, 14 of 17 (82.3%) had a donation after circulatory death protocol with 14 of 17 respondents (82.3%) supporting a national protocol. Regarding organ optimization, 92 institutions (77.3%) used vasoactive drugs to achieve a target mean arterial blood pressure with 82 centers (68.9%) employing positive end-expiratory pressure and FIO2 to optimize oxygenation. Eight centers (6.7%) used heparin premortem compared with two of 17 transplant centers (11.8%). Two centers have used phentolamine to facilitate organ retrieval, with another five centers (4.2%) cannulating vessels premortem.

CONCLUSIONS: Our survey revealed varying approaches and views toward donation after circulatory death across England. A greater than expected percentage use premortem cannulation, heparinization, and phentolamine despite current guidance in England to the contrary. The majority of institutions practicing donation after circulatory death with protocols in place favor the development of national guidelines, particularly with respect to organ optimization. We believe that such a protocol would help to address potential barriers to donation after circulatory death, which may lead to increased donation rates and improved outcomes.