Living Paid Organ Transplantation Results in Unacceptably High Recipient Morbidity and Mortality

• Published in: Transplantation proceedings 2005-03, Vol.37 (2), p.560-562
• Main Authors: Inston, N.G., Gill, D., Al-Hakim, A., Ready, A.R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biological and medical sciences; Donor Selection - economics; England; Fees and Charges; Follow-Up Studies; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Fundamental immunology; Humans; Kidney Transplantation - mortality; Kidney Transplantation - pathology; Living Donors; Medical sciences; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Postoperative Complications - pathology; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases; Survival Analysis; Tissue, organ and graft immunology
• ISSN: 0041-1345; 1873-2623
• DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.12.178

The ethical debate surrounding the payment of living unrelated donors continues despite very little evidence regarding the outcome. The aim of this audit was to identify the scale of the problem and assess the results of patients undergoing these procedures. The large Indo-Asian population within our region has a high demand for renal replacement therapy and transplantation. These patients have a limited chance of receiving a transplant for several reasons and some resort to traveling abroad, against medical advice, to procure an unrelated donor kidney transplant. Following an initial audit in our region, a national audit was conducted within the UK. A total of 23 patients were identified, all of whom had done so against medical advice. Mortality from causes directly related to transplantation was high in this group (35%), as was graft loss. The overall rate of successful transplants was only 44% (overall graft loss was 56%) in the short term. The information regarding both donor and recipient, provided from the transplanting center, was inadequate in all cases. These results, which almost certainly represent an underestimate of an ongoing situation, reinforce the standpoint that organ trading is associated with unacceptable risks and poor outcomes. The basis of this trade in organs is based on monetary rather than clinical criteria and such exploitation of both donor and recipient lead us to conclude that this practice cannot be endorsed and even the most desperate dialysis patients should be reminded of the unacceptable risks involved in this practice.