Recipient outcomes after transplantation with organs from donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors can compare favourably and even match recipient outcomes after transplantation with organs from donation after brain death donors. Success is dependent upon establishing common practices and accepted protocols that allow the safe sharing of DCD organs and maximise the use of the DCD donor pool. The British Transplantation Society 'Guideline on transplantation from deceased donors after circulatory death' has recently been updated. This manuscript summarises the relevant recommendations from chapters specifically related to organ donation.

Organ procurement is a complex and unique procedure that warrants the creation of an evidence-based practice guideline. Anesthesia care of the donor may adversely impact the fate of organs once transplanted. The following article gives a brief review of the literature, and a guideline for providing anesthesia during an organ procurement which was created for a large, level-one, academic facility. Care of the organ donor during the preoperative phase is frequently discussed in the literature; however, there remains a need for further information on the care of the organ donor intraoperatively.

This report provides recommendations from the Research and Innovation domain as part of the International Donation and Transplantation Legislative and Policy Forum (hereafter the Forum) to provide expert guidance on the structure of an ideal organ and tissue donation and transplantation system. The recommendations focus on deceased donation research and are intended for clinicians, investigators, decision-makers, and patient, family, and donor (PFD) partners involved in the field.

We identified topics impacting donation research through consensus using nominal group technique. Members performed narrative reviews and synthesized current knowledge on each topic, which included academic articles, policy documents, and gray literature. Using the nominal group technique, committee members discussed significant findings, which provided evidence for our recommendations. The Forum's scientific committee then vetted recommendations.

We developed 16 recommendations in 3 key areas to provide stakeholders guidance in developing a robust deceased donor research framework. These include PFD and public involvement in research; donor, surrogate, and recipient consent within a research ethics framework; and data management. We highlight the importance of PFD and public partner involvement in research, we define the minimum ethical requirements for the protection of donors and recipients of both target and nontarget organ recipients, and we recommend the creation of a centrally administered donor research oversight committee, a single specialist institutional review board, and a research oversight body to facilitate coordination and ethical oversight of organ donor intervention research.

Our recommendations provide a roadmap for developing and implementing an ethical deceased donation research framework that continually builds public trust. Although these recommendations can be applied to jurisdictions developing or reforming their organ and tissue donation and transplantation system, stakeholders are encouraged to collaborate and respond to their specific jurisdictional needs related to organ and tissue shortages.

There is a shared global commitment to improving baseline donation and transplantation performance metrics in a manner consistent with ethics and local cultural and social factors. The law is one tool that can help improve these metrics. Although legal systems vary across jurisdictions, our objective was to create expert, consensus guidance for law and policymakers on foundational issues underlying organ and tissue donation and transplantation (OTDT) systems around the world.

Using the nominal group technique, a group composed of legal academics, a transplant coordinator/clinician, and a patient partner identified topic areas and recommendations on foundational legal issues. The recommendations were informed by narrative literature reviews conducted by group members based on their areas of expertise, which yielded a range of academic articles, policy documents, and sources of law. Best practices were identified from relevant sources in each subtopic, which formed the basis of the recommendations contained herein.

We reached consensus on 12 recommendations grouped into 5 subtopics: (i) legal definitions and legislative scope, (ii) consent requirements for donation' (iii) allocation of organs and tissue' (iv) operation of OTDT systems' and (v) travel for transplant and organ trafficking. We have differentiated between those foundational legal principles for which there is a firm basis of support with those requiring further consideration and resolution. Seven such areas of controversy are identified and discussed alongside relevant recommendations.

Our recommendations encompass some principles staunchly enshrined in the OTDT landscape (eg, the dead donor rule), whereas others reflect more recent developments in practice (eg, mandatory referral). Although some principles are widely accepted, there is not always consensus as to how they ought to be implemented. As the OTDT landscape continues to evolve, recommendations must be reconsidered for the law to keep pace with developments in knowledge, technology, and practice.

This report contains recommendations from 1 of 7 domains of the International Donation and Transplantation Legislative and Policy Forum (the Forum). The purpose is to provide expert guidance on the structure and function of Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation (OTDT) systems. The intended audience is OTDT stakeholders working to establish or improve existing systems.

The Forum was initiated by Transplant Québec and co-hosted by the Canadian Donation and Transplantation Program partnered with multiple national and international donation and transplantation organizations. This domain group included administrative, clinical, and academic experts in OTDT systems and 3 patient, family, and donor partners. We identified topic areas and recommendations through consensus, using the nominal group technique. Selected topics were informed by narrative literature reviews and vetted by the Forum's scientific committee. We presented these recommendations publicly, with delegate feedback being incorporated into the final report.

This report has 33 recommendations grouped into 10 topic areas. Topic areas include the need for public and professional education, processes to assure timely referral of patients who are potential donors, and processes to ensure that standards are properly enforced.

The recommendations encompass the multiple roles organ donation organizations play in the donation and transplantation process. We recognize the diversity of local conditions but believe that they could be adapted and applied by organ donation organizations across the world to accomplish their fundamental objectives of assuring that everyone who desires to become an organ donor is given that opportunity in a safe, equitable, and transparent manner.

A position statement of the International Pediatric Transplant Association endorsing prioritizing pediatric recipients for deceased donor organ allocation, examining the key ethical arguments that serve as the foundation for that position, and making specific policy recommendations to support prioritizing pediatric recipients for deceased donor organ allocation globally.

From the context of organ donation, COVID-19 vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is important as there is an ethical dilemma in utilizing versus discarding organs from potential donors succumbing to VITT. This consensus statement is an attempt by the National Organ and Tissue Transplant Organization (NOTTO) apex technical committees India to formulate the guidelines for deceased organ donation and transplantation in relation to VITT to help in appropriate decision making. VITT is a rare entity, but a meticulous approach should be taken by the Organ Procurement Organization's (OPO) team in screening such cases. All such cases must be strictly notified to the national authorities like NOTTO, as a resource for data collection and ensuring compliance withprotocols in the management of adverse events following immunization. Organs from any patient who developed thrombotic events up to 4 weeks after adenoviral vector-based vaccination should be linked to VITT and investigated appropriately. The viability of the organs must be thoroughly checked by the OPO, and the final decision in relation to organ use should be decided by the expert committee of the OPO team consisting of a virologist, a hematologist, and atreating team. Considering the organ shortage, in case of suspected/confirmed VITT, both clinicians and patients should consider the risk-benefit equationbased on available experience, and an appropriate written informed consent of potential recipients and family members should be obtained before transplantation of organs from suspected or proven VITT donors.

There is a wide gap between patients who need transplants and the organs that are available in India. Extending the standard donation criterion is certainly important to address the scarcity of organs for transplantation. Intensivists play a major role in the success of deceased donor organ transplants. Recommendations for deceased donor organ evaluation are not discussed in most intensive care guidelines. The purpose of this position statement is to establish current evidence-based recommendations for multiprofessional critical care staff in the evaluation, assessment, and selection of potential organ donors. These recommendations will give "real-world" criteria that are acceptable in the Indian context. The aim of this set of recommendations is to both increase the number and enhance the quality of transplantable organs.

Zirpe KG, Tiwari AM, Pandit RA, Govil D, Mishra RC, Samavedam S, et al. Recommendations for Evaluation and Selection of Deceased Organ Donor: Position Statement of ISCCM. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(S2):S43-S50.

Consent in medical practice is a process riddled with layers of complexities. To some extent, this is inevitable given that different medical conditions raise different sets of issues for doctors and patients. Informed consent and risk assessment are highly significant public health issues that have become even more prominent during the course of the Covid-19 pandemic. In this article we identity relevant factors for clinicians to consider when ensuring consent for solid organ transplantation. Consent to undergo solid organ transplantation is more complex than most surgical and other clinical interventions because of the many factors involved, the complexity of the options and the need to balance competing risks. We first out the context in which consent is given by the patient. We then outline the legal principles pertaining to consent in medical practice as it applies in the UK and the implication of recent legal judgments. The third section highlights specific complexities of consent in organ transplantation and identifies relevant factors in determining consent for organ transplantation. The fourth section offers practical recommendations. We propose a novel 'multi-factor approach' to informed consent in transplantation which includes understanding risk, effective communication, and robust review processes. Whilst understanding risk and communication are a given, our suggestion is that including review processes into the consent process is essential. By this we specifically mean identifying and creating room for discretion in decision-making to better ensure that informed consent is given in practice. Discretion implies that health care professionals use their judgement to use the legal judgements as guidance rather than prescriptive. Discretion is further defined by identifying the relevant options and scope of clinical and personal factors in specified transplantation decisions. In particular, we also highlight the need to pay attention to the institutional dimension in the consent process. To that end, our recommendations identify a gap in the current approaches to consent. The identification of areas of discretion in decision-making processes is essential for determining when patients need to be involved. In other words, clinicians and healthcare professionals need to consider carefully when there is room for direction and where there is little or no room for exercising discretion. In sum, our proposed approach is a modest contribution to the on-going debate about consent in medicine.