Challenging the Moral Status of Blood Donation

The World Health Organisation encourages that blood donation becomes voluntary and unremunerated, a system already operated in the UK. Drawing on public documents and videos, this paper argues that blood donation is regarded and presented as altruistic and supererogatory. In advertisements, donation is presented as something undertaken for the benefit of others, a matter attracting considerable gratitude from recipients and the collecting organisation. It is argued that regarding blood donation as an act of supererogation is wrongheaded, and an alternative account of blood donation as moral obligation is presented. Two arguments are offered in support of this position. First, the principle of beneficence, understood in a broad consequentialist framework obliges donation where the benefit to the recipient is large and the cost to the donor relatively small. This argument can be applied, with differing levels of normativity, to various acts of donation. Second, the wrongness of free riding requires individuals to contribute to collective systems from which they benefit. Alone and in combination these arguments present moral reasons for donation, recognised in communication strategies elsewhere. Research is required to evaluate the potential effects on donation of a campaign which presents blood donation as moral obligation, but of wider importance is the recognition that other-regarding considerations in relation to our own as well as others’ health result in a range not only of choices but also of obligations

Making sense of risk. Donor risk communication in families considering living liverdonation to a child

This paper contributes to the growing line of thought in bioethics that respect for autonomy should not be equated to the facilitation of individualistic self determination through standard requirements of informed consent in all healthcare contexts. The paper describes how in the context of donation for living related liver transplantation (LRLT) meaningful, responsible decision making is often embedded within family processes and its negotiation. We suggest that good donor risk communication in families promote “conscientious autonomy” and “reflective trust”. From this, the paper offers the suggestion that transplant teams and other relevant professionals have to broaden their role and responsibility for risk communication beyond proper disclosure by addressing the impact of varied psychosocial conditions on risk interpretation and assessment for potential donors and family stakeholders. In conclusion, we suggest further research questions on how professional responsibility and role-taking in risk communication should be morally understood

Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography compared to unenhanced CT for stone and obstruction in patients with renal failure

BACKGROUND: To determine accuracy of ultrasound (US) kidney, ureter and bladder (KUB) compared to un-enhanced helical CT (UHCT) in patients with renal failure in the diagnosis of stone and obstruction. METHODS: This is a case controlled study conducted in the period from June 2000 to July 2003 at a university hospital. All patients had both US and UHCT scan. Patients with serum creatinine ≥ 1.8 mg/dl were included in the study. Only direct visualization of stone was considered as confirmatory. In both the studies, UHCT and US, presence of stone and obstruction were noted. The relevant biochemicals, radiological and clinical records of all the patients were analyzed. Data was analyzed using commercially available software. RESULTS: During the period of study 864 patients had UHCT for evaluation of the urinary tract in patients presenting with flank pain. Out of these 34 patients had both UHCT and US done within a span of one day and had serum creatinine of ≥1.8 mg/dl. Mean age was 48 ±15.8 years and 59% of patients were males. UHCT identified renal stones in 21 (62%), whereas 17 of these were identified on US, with a sensitivity of 81%. Of the four patients with renal stones missed on US, three were identified on plain x-ray; the mean size of stones missed was 6.3 mm. Of the 22 (65%) patients with ureteric stone on UHCT, US could only identify 10; a further 7 were identified on x-ray KUB, giving a sensitivity of 45% (US alone) and 77% (US with x-ray KUB). CONCLUSIONS: US is sensitive and specific for renal stones, 81% and 100% and for hydronephrosis, 93% and 100%, respectively. Its sensitivity to pick ureteric stone (46%) and to identify hydroureter (50%) is low. Addition of x-ray KUB abdomen increases the sensitivity for ureteric stones to 77%

Predictive factors for functional improvement after intravitreal bevacizumab therapy for macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion

To identify predictive factors for improvement of visual acuity and central retinal thickness by intravitreal bevacizumab for the treatment of macular edema (ME) due to branch retinal vein occlusion (BRVO). Two hundred and five eyes from 204 patients with ME secondary to BRVO were retrospectively included at six sites. All eyes received intravitreal bevacizumab therapy (1.25 mg/0.05 ml). The mean follow-up was 36.8 +/- 12.7 weeks (range, 18 to 54 weeks). Measurement of ETDRS best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, in all eyes) and optical coherence tomography (OCT, in 87% of eyes) were performed at baseline and at follow-up examinations every 12 weeks. Using fluorescein angiography, the perfusion status of the macula at baseline could be assessed in 84% of the eyes. The main outcome measures were changes in BCVA and central retinal thickness (CRT). For analysis of predictive factors, the results at 24 weeks were used. The median BCVA was 0.6 LogMAR at baseline and improved to 0.4 LogMAR at 24 and 48 weeks. This visual improvement was associated by a significant reduction in CRT, decreasing from a baseline of 454 mu m to 267 mu m and 248 mu m after 24 and 48 weeks respectively. Eyes with ME and intact (perfused) or interrupted (ischemic) foveal capillary ring showed a 2-line increase of median BCVA [45 eyes (22%) and 128 eyes (62%) respectively]. However, the final median BCVA was significantly worse in eyes with ischemic ME (0.6 versus 0.3 logMAR in perfused ME). Other factors for visual improvement were absence of previous treatments of the ME, age younger than 60 years and low baseline BCVA (a parts per thousand yen0.6 logMAR) (2, 3, and 2 median BCVA lines increase respectively). Furthermore, eyes with duration of the ME of less than 12 months responded with a 3-line increase of the median BCVA. Final CRT only showed minor differences between the subgroups. During the entire follow-up, retreatments were performed in 85% of the eyes, with a median number of injections of three (mean 3.2; range, 1 to 10) and a median time-interval between injections of 11.6 weeks (mean 14.6 weeks). Intravitreal injection of bevacizumab resulted in a significant improvement of BCVA and reduction of ME in BRVO. Baseline BCVA, patient's age, and duration of BRVO were found to be of prognostic relevance for visual improvement. A less favorable outcome of the bevacizumab therapy in eyes with longstanding BRVO would advocate initiation of treatment within 12 months after onset

Doctor can I buy a new kidney? I've heard it isn't forbidden: what is the role of the nephrologist when dealing with a patient who wants to buy a kidney?

Organ trafficking is officially banned in several countries and by the main Nephrology Societies. However, this practice is widespread and is allowed or tolerated in many countries, hence, in the absence of a universal law, the caregiver may be asked for advice, placing him/her in a difficult balance between legal aspects, moral principles and ethical judgments. In spite of the Istanbul declaration, which is a widely shared position statement against organ trafficking, the controversy on mercenary organ donation is still open and some experts argue against taking a negative stance. In the absence of clear evidence showing the clinical disadvantages of mercenary transplantation compared to chronic dialysis, self-determination of the patient (and, with several caveats, of the donor) may conflict with other ethical principles, first of all non-maleficence. The present paper was drawn up with the participation of the students, as part of the ethics course at our medical school. It discusses the situation in which the physician acts as a counselor for the patient in the way of a sort of “reverse” informed consent, in which the patient asks advice regarding a complex personal decision, and includes a peculiar application of the four principles (beneficence, non-maleficence, justice and autonomy) to the donor and recipient parties