Ocular tissue distribution in the State of São Paulo: analysis on corneal discarding reasons
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.3041.3196Keywords:
Tissue and Organ Procurement; Corneal Transplantation; Tissue Banks; Tissue and Organ Harvesting; Tissue Donors; NursingAbstract
Objective
to identify the reasons for refusal of corneas.
Method
this was a cross-sectional, retrospective, descriptive and correlational study composed of 5,560 optical corneas. The information was taken from the notification, organ procurement and distribution centers database as well as donor records. Descriptive statistics were used for the analysis of categorical variables and specific tests with a significance level of 5% for assessing the associations between variables. This study met the ethical aspects of scientific research.
Results
60% of the donors were male and 40% died by circulatory problems. The main reason for refusal as informed by transplant teams is the donor’s age and the endothelial cell count. For each year added to the donor’s age, there is a 1% decrease in the chance that this cornea will be used for transplantation, and the increase of 100 cells per mm2 increases the chances that this cornea will be used by 9%.
Conclusion
the main cause of refusal in the acceptance of corneal tissue is related to the age and the endothelial cell count.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
