Maastricht criteria III in the global context: a systematic review of development and implementation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12923/pielxxiw-2025-0039Keywords:
nursing, ethics, heart arrest, tissue and organ procurement, systematic reviewsAbstract
Aim. This review examines the development and implementation of the Maastricht Criteria III in controlled (cDCD) and uncontrolled (uDCD) Donation after Circulatory Death in various healthcare systems, evaluates compliance with the no-touch interval, and the influence of opt-in versus opt-out consent models on the availability and use of donor organs.
Material and methods. Following Evidence-Based Practice principles, a systematic search was performed in full-text electronic databases covering healthcare, bioethics, and transplantation sciences. Peer-reviewed, full-text studies relevant to DCD classification and clinical application were included. Additionally, a critical methodological quality appraisal of all included studies was conducted using a standardised tool, thereby enhancing the robustness of our conclusions.
Results. Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, addressing DCD classification, consent frameworks, no-touch interval adherence, and organ procurement impact. Substantial international variability emerged: presumed consent (opt-out) systems achieved higher donor conversion rates, whereas extended no-touch intervals detrimentally affected organ viability.
Conclusions. This review presents a structured analysis of Maastricht Criteria III application, particularly in Europe. cDCD follows increasingly standardised protocols, while uDCD remains inconsistently implemented due to ethical and logistical challenges. To enhance donor identification, organ utilisation, and transplantation outcomes, it is essential to standardise protocols, refine ischemia-mitigation techniques, and strengthen international collaboration.
References
1. Rudge C, Matesanz R, Delmonico FL, et al. International practices of organ donation. Br. J. Anaesth. 2012;108: i48-55. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aer399
2. González-Méndez MI, López-Rodríguez L. Organ donation after controlled cardiac death under Maastricht category III: ethical implications and end-of-life care. Enferm. Clin. (Engl. Ed). 2019; 29(1): 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2017.10.009.
3. Kootstra G, Daemen JHC, Oomen AP. Categories of non-heart-beating donors. Transplant Proc. 1995; 27(5): 2893-2894.
4. Barreda Monteoliva P, Redondo-Pachón D, Minambres García E, Rodrigo Calabia E. Kidney transplant outcome of expanded criteria donors after circulatory death. Nefrologia. 2022; 42(2): 135-144.
5. Ortega-Deballon I, Hornby L, Shemie SD. Protocols for uncontrolled donation after circulatory death: a systematic review of international guidelines, practices and transplant outcomes. Crit Care. 2015; 19: 268. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-0985-6.
6. Kootstra G, van Heurn E. Non-heart-beating donation of kidneys for transplantation. Nat. Clin. Pract. Nephrol. 2007; 3(3): 154-163. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpneph0426.
7. Daemen JWHC, Oomen APA, Janssen MA, et al. Glutathione S-transferase as predictor of functional outcome in transplantation of machine-preserved non-heart-beating donor kidneys. Transplantation. 1997; 63(1): 89-93. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007890-199701150-00017.
8. Daemen JWUC, de Wit AJ, Heineman E, et al. Kidney transplantation from non-heart-beating donors. Transplant. Rev. 1995; 9(4): 159-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/0955-470X(95)80001-O.
9. Thuong M, Ruiz A, Evrard P, et al. New classification of donation after circulatory death donors: definitions and terminology. Transpl. Int. 2016; 29(7): 749-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.12776.
10. Manara AR, Murphy PG, O’Callaghan G. Donation after circulatory death. Br. J. Anaesth. 2012; 108: i108-i121. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aer357.
11. Massad E, Chaib E. Mathematical approaches to liver transplantation. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2020, p. 192. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2018-0-02128-3.
12. Talbot D, D’Alessandro A. Organ donation and transplantation after cardiac death. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009, p. 335 https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199217335.001.0001.
13. Cvachovec K, Černý V, Duška F, et al. Doporučený postup před odběrem orgánů od zemřelých dárců po nevratné zástavě oběhu. Anesteziol. Intenziv. Med. 2014; 25(2): 145-146.
14. Detry O, Le Dinh H, Noterdaeme T, et al. Categories of donation after cardiocirculatory death. Transplant. Proc. 2012; 44(5): 1189-1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.05.001.
15. Kin T, Noguchi H, Kawaguchi A. Is donation after circulatory determination of death in Japan uncontrolled or controlled? OBM Transplant. 2024; 8(2): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.21926/obm.transplant.2402216.
16. Baláž P. Odběry orgánů k transplantaci. Prague: Karolinum Press; 2012, p. 259.
17. Stevens KR. Systematic reviews: the heart of evidence-based practice. AACN Adv. Crit. Care. 2001; 12(4): 529-538. https://doi.org/10.1097/00044067-200111000-00009.
18. Finfgeld-Connett D. Use of content analysis to conduct knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews. Qual. Res. 2014; 14(3): 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113481790.
19. Harrison R, Jones B, Gardner P, et al. Quality assessment with diverse studies (QuADS): an appraisal tool for methodological and reporting quality in systematic reviews of mixed- or multi-method studies. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2021; 21: 144. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06122-y.
20. Shemie SD, Baker AJ, Knoll G, et al. Donation after cardiocirculatory death in Canada. CMAJ. 2006; 175: S1-S24. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.060895.
21. Graftieaux JP, Bollaert PE, Haddad L, et al. Contribution of the ethics committee of the French Intensive Care Society to describing a scenario for implementing organ donation after Maastricht type III cardiocirculatory death in France. Ann. Intensive Care. 2012; 2: 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/2110-5820-2-23.
22. Evrard P. Belgian modified classification of Maastricht for donors after circulatory death. Transplant. Proc. 2014; 46(9): 3138-3142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2014.09.169.
23. Kenmochi T, Nishiyama S, Hayashi M, et al. Organ donation from brain-dead and circulatory-dead donors: single-institution experiences. Transplant. Proc. 2014; 46(4): 1051-1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2013.11.064.
24. Domínguez-Gil B, Duranteau J, Mateos A, et al. Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death: European practices and recommendations for the development and optimization of an effective programme. Transpl. Int. 2016; 29(8): 842-859. https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.12734.
25. Giannini A, Abelli M, Azzoni G, et al. “Why can’t I give you my organs after my heart has stopped beating?” Main clinical, organisational, ethical and legal issues concerning organ donation after circulatory death in Italy. Milan: Università degli Studi di Milano; 2016 [cited 2025 Feb 20]. Available from: https://air.unimi.it/ handle/2434/381186.
26. Hodgson R, Young AL, Attia MA, et al. Impact of a national controlled donation after circulatory death programme on organ donation in the United Kingdom: a 10-year study. Am. J. Transplant. 2017; 17(12): 3172-3182. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14374.
27. Lomero M, Gardiner D, Coll E, et al. Donation after circulatory death today: an updated overview of the European landscape. Transpl. Int. 2020; 33(1): 76-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.13506.
28. Lepoittevin M, Giraud S, Kerforne T, et al. How to improve results after DCD (donation after circulation death). Presse Med. 2022; 51(4): 104143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lpm.2022.104143.
29. Summers DM, Watson CJE, Pettigrew GJ, et al. Kidney donation after circulatory death (DCD): state of the art. Kidney Int. 2015; 88(2): 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.2015.88.
30. Truby LK, Casalinova S, Patel CB, et al. Donation after circulatory death in heart transplantation: history, outcomes, clinical challenges, and opportunities to expand the donor pool. J. Card. Fail. 2022; 28(9): 1456-1463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cardfail.2022.03.353.
31. Ceulemans LJ, Vanluyten C, Monbaliu D, et al. Lung transplant outcome following donation after euthanasia. J. Heart Lung Transplant. 2022; 41(6): 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healun.2022.01.1375.
32. Chassot M, Scheen M, Wassmer CH, et al. Donor after circulatory death in pancreas transplantation: a scoping review of the literature. Front. Transplant. 2025; 4: 1517354. https://doi.org/10.3389/frtra.2025.1517354.
33. Molina M, Domínguez-Gil B, Pérez-Villares JM, et al. Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death: ethics of implementation. Curr. Opin. Organ. Transplant. 2019; 24(3): 358-363. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOT.0000000000000648.
34. Doerry K, Oh J, Vincent D, Fischer L, et al. Religious and cultural aspects of organ donation: narrowing the gap through understanding different religious beliefs. Pediatr. Transplant. 2022; 26(7): e14339. https://doi.org/10.1111/petr.14339.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jana Křivková, Jiří Šimek, Alena Lochmannová, Pavel Leden (Autor)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
