首页> 外文期刊>Critical care : >Pro/con debate: In patients who are potential candidates for organ donation after cardiac death, starting medications and/or interventions for the sole purpose of making the organs more viable is an acceptable practice
【24h】

Pro/con debate: In patients who are potential candidates for organ donation after cardiac death, starting medications and/or interventions for the sole purpose of making the organs more viable is an acceptable practice

机译:赞成/反对辩论:对于可能在心脏死亡后捐献器官的患者,以使器官更能生存为唯一目的而开始药物治疗和/或干预是可以接受的做法

获取原文
           

摘要

Several hospitals have been developing programmes for organ donation after cardiac death. Such programmes offer options for organ donation to patients who do not meet brain-death criteria but wish to donate their organs after withdrawal of life-support. These programmes also increase the available organ pool at a time when demand exceeds supply. Given that potential donors are managed in intensive care units, intensivists will be key components of these programmes. Donation after cardiac death clearly carries a number of important ethical issues with it. In the present issue of Critical Care two established groups debate the ethical acceptability of using medications/interventions in potential organ donors for the sole purpose of making the organs more viable. Such debates will be an increasingly common component of intensivists' future practice.
机译:几家医院已经在制定心脏死亡后器官捐赠的计划。此类程序为不符合脑死亡标准但希望在撤回生命支持后捐献其器官的患者提供器官捐赠的选择。这些程序还会在需求超过供应时增加可用的器官库。鉴于潜在的捐赠者由重症监护病房管理,因此,强化医生将是这些计划的关键组成部分。心脏死亡后的捐赠显然会带来许多重要的道德问题。在本期《重症监护》中,两个成立的小组讨论了在潜在器官捐献者中使用药物/干预措施的伦理可接受性,其唯一目的是使器官更加存活。这样的辩论将成为强化主义者未来实践中越来越普遍的组成部分。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号