评估韩国的脑死亡/神经死亡标准判定程序:从10年未完成捐献数据中获得的启示。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurocritical Care Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1007/s12028-024-02072-5
Seungyon Koh, Sungju Park, Mijin Lee, Hanki Kim, Won Jung Lee, Jae-Myeong Lee, Jun Young Choi
{"title":"评估韩国的脑死亡/神经死亡标准判定程序:从10年未完成捐献数据中获得的启示。","authors":"Seungyon Koh, Sungju Park, Mijin Lee, Hanki Kim, Won Jung Lee, Jae-Myeong Lee, Jun Young Choi","doi":"10.1007/s12028-024-02072-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to analyze the current status of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) determination in Korea over a decade, identifying key areas for improvement in the process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from the Korea Organ Donation Agency spanning 2011 to 2021, focusing on donors whose donations were not completed. The study reviewed demographics, medical settings, diagnoses, and outcomes, with particular emphasis on cases classified as nonbrain death and those resulting in death by cardiac arrest during the BD/DNC assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 5047 patients evaluated for potential brain death from 2011 to 2021, 361 were identified as noncompleted donors. The primary reasons for noncompletion included nonbrain death (n = 68, 18.8%), cardiac arrests during the BD/DNC assessment process (n = 80, 22.2%), organ ineligibility (n = 151, 41.8%), and logistical and legal challenges (n = 62, 17.2%). Notably, 25 (36.8%) of them failed to meet the minimum clinical criteria, and 7 of them were potential cases of disagreement between the two clinical examinations. Additionally, most cardiac arrests (n = 44, 55.0%) occurred between the first and second examinations, indicating management challenges in critically ill patients during the assessment period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study highlights significant challenges in the BD/DNC determination process, including the need for improved consistency in neurologic examinations and the management of critically ill patients. The study underscores the importance of refining protocols and training to enhance the accuracy and reliability of brain death assessments, while also ensuring streamlined and effective organ donation practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":19118,"journal":{"name":"Neurocritical Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing the Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria Determination Process in Korea: Insights from 10-Year Noncompleted Donation Data.\",\"authors\":\"Seungyon Koh, Sungju Park, Mijin Lee, Hanki Kim, Won Jung Lee, Jae-Myeong Lee, Jun Young Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12028-024-02072-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to analyze the current status of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) determination in Korea over a decade, identifying key areas for improvement in the process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from the Korea Organ Donation Agency spanning 2011 to 2021, focusing on donors whose donations were not completed. The study reviewed demographics, medical settings, diagnoses, and outcomes, with particular emphasis on cases classified as nonbrain death and those resulting in death by cardiac arrest during the BD/DNC assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 5047 patients evaluated for potential brain death from 2011 to 2021, 361 were identified as noncompleted donors. The primary reasons for noncompletion included nonbrain death (n = 68, 18.8%), cardiac arrests during the BD/DNC assessment process (n = 80, 22.2%), organ ineligibility (n = 151, 41.8%), and logistical and legal challenges (n = 62, 17.2%). Notably, 25 (36.8%) of them failed to meet the minimum clinical criteria, and 7 of them were potential cases of disagreement between the two clinical examinations. Additionally, most cardiac arrests (n = 44, 55.0%) occurred between the first and second examinations, indicating management challenges in critically ill patients during the assessment period.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study highlights significant challenges in the BD/DNC determination process, including the need for improved consistency in neurologic examinations and the management of critically ill patients. The study underscores the importance of refining protocols and training to enhance the accuracy and reliability of brain death assessments, while also ensuring streamlined and effective organ donation practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurocritical Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurocritical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02072-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocritical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-024-02072-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在分析十年来韩国根据神经学标准判定脑死亡/死亡的现状:本研究旨在分析十年来韩国脑死亡/按神经学标准死亡(BD/DNC)判定的现状,找出这一过程中需要改进的关键领域:我们对韩国器官捐献局 2011 年至 2021 年的数据进行了回顾性分析,重点关注未完成捐献的捐献者。该研究回顾了人口统计学、医疗环境、诊断和结果,特别强调了在 BD/DNC 评估过程中被归类为非脑死亡和因心脏骤停导致死亡的病例:在 2011 年至 2021 年期间接受潜在脑死亡评估的 5047 名患者中,有 361 人被确定为未完成捐献者。未完成捐献的主要原因包括非脑死亡(68 人,占 18.8%)、在 BD/DNC 评估过程中心脏骤停(80 人,占 22.2%)、器官不合格(151 人,占 41.8%)以及后勤和法律挑战(62 人,占 17.2%)。值得注意的是,其中 25 例(36.8%)不符合最低临床标准,7 例可能是两次临床检查结果不一致。此外,大多数心脏骤停(44 例,55.0%)发生在第一次和第二次检查之间,这表明危重病人在评估期间的管理面临挑战:我们的研究凸显了 BD/DNC 判定过程中的重大挑战,包括需要提高神经系统检查和危重病人管理的一致性。这项研究强调了完善规程和培训以提高脑死亡评估准确性和可靠性的重要性,同时也确保了器官捐献实践的简化和有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing the Brain Death/Death by Neurologic Criteria Determination Process in Korea: Insights from 10-Year Noncompleted Donation Data.

Background: This study aimed to analyze the current status of brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC) determination in Korea over a decade, identifying key areas for improvement in the process.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from the Korea Organ Donation Agency spanning 2011 to 2021, focusing on donors whose donations were not completed. The study reviewed demographics, medical settings, diagnoses, and outcomes, with particular emphasis on cases classified as nonbrain death and those resulting in death by cardiac arrest during the BD/DNC assessment.

Results: Of the 5047 patients evaluated for potential brain death from 2011 to 2021, 361 were identified as noncompleted donors. The primary reasons for noncompletion included nonbrain death (n = 68, 18.8%), cardiac arrests during the BD/DNC assessment process (n = 80, 22.2%), organ ineligibility (n = 151, 41.8%), and logistical and legal challenges (n = 62, 17.2%). Notably, 25 (36.8%) of them failed to meet the minimum clinical criteria, and 7 of them were potential cases of disagreement between the two clinical examinations. Additionally, most cardiac arrests (n = 44, 55.0%) occurred between the first and second examinations, indicating management challenges in critically ill patients during the assessment period.

Conclusions: Our study highlights significant challenges in the BD/DNC determination process, including the need for improved consistency in neurologic examinations and the management of critically ill patients. The study underscores the importance of refining protocols and training to enhance the accuracy and reliability of brain death assessments, while also ensuring streamlined and effective organ donation practices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurocritical Care
Neurocritical Care 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
8.60%
发文量
221
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurocritical Care is a peer reviewed scientific publication whose major goal is to disseminate new knowledge on all aspects of acute neurological care. It is directed towards neurosurgeons, neuro-intensivists, neurologists, anesthesiologists, emergency physicians, and critical care nurses treating patients with urgent neurologic disorders. These are conditions that may potentially evolve rapidly and could need immediate medical or surgical intervention. Neurocritical Care provides a comprehensive overview of current developments in intensive care neurology, neurosurgery and neuroanesthesia and includes information about new therapeutic avenues and technological innovations. Neurocritical Care is the official journal of the Neurocritical Care Society.
期刊最新文献
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of External Ventricular Drains and Intraparenchymal Pressure Monitors for Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Correction: Risk Factors for Cerebral Vasospasm After Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies. Looking Back at the Lance-Adams Syndrome: Uncommon and Unalike. Variations in Autoregulation-Based Optimal Cerebral Perfusion Pressure Determination Using Two Integrated Neuromonitoring Platforms in a Trauma Patient. Association Between Early Mobilization and Functional Outcomes in Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Multicenter Retrospective Propensity Score-Matched Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1