Organ Recipients Face Death or Disease

[flashl]

Doctors Say Risks Are Small, But Decisions Are Tough

Last year a patient at Boston's renowned Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center was sick enough to be at the top of a liver donation list, but conscious enough to calculate his risks of dying.

When a liver became available, it came with a catch. The donor had a history of risky sexual behavior and the organ could give the middle-aged recipient hepatitis — or worse, HIV/AIDS.

...

"It depends on what might be transmitted," she said. "But if you look at it from the perspective of a dying patient, would he rather die or have a small chance of developing something like hepatitis B? Most patients take the organ and a chance at life."

More patients and their doctors are struggling with this dilemma as policies for using "high-risk" organs — those that might carry infectious diseases like HIV or undetected cancers — are shifting, according to transplant experts.

ABC

[kestrel91316]

1. Hobson's Choice...........

[trashcanistanista]

2. At the time the patient becomes a donor, it should

be mandatory to perform a blood test for HIV and the Hep A, B and C viruses. This should be standard procedure. The only reason I can think of as to why this isn't done is the hospital wants to save a few bucks and put this unreasonable burden of risk onto the recipient of the organ.

[dropkickpa]

4. They DO test

But if exposure was recent it may not be detectable yet. HIV, as just one example, can take up to a year for seroconversion to occur.

[Warpy]

3. Without a transplant, the person would have a miserable death

in a matter of weeks or maybe months. With an HIV infected organ, the person would have 10-15 years with no HIV symptoms, about the life span of a lot of transplanted organs.

No brainer to me. (and no, they can't do brains yet. Pity.)