Smoker's Lungs Donation

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,102
Reaction score
144
Soldier dies after receiving smoker's lungs in transplant
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A leading UK hospital has defended its practice of using organs donated by smokers after the death of a soldier who received the cancerous lungs of a heavy smoker.

Corporal Matthew Millington, 31, died at his home in 2008, less than a year after receiving a transplant that was supposed to save his life at Papworth Hospital -- the UK's largest specialist cardiothoracic hospital, in Cambridgeshire, east England.

Papworth Hospital released a statement saying using donor lungs from smokers was not "unusual."

The statement added that the hospital had no option but to use lungs from smokers as "the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower," if they didn't.

Should hospitals use smokers' lungs in transplants?

An inquest held last week heard that Millington, who served in the Queen's Royal Lancers, was serving in Iraq in 2005 when he was diagnosed with an incurable condition that left him unable to breathe.

He was told he required a transplant and in April 2007 received a double lung transplant at Papworth Hospital.

Less than a year later, doctors discovered a tumor in the new lungs. Despite radiotherapy, Millington died on February 8, 2008, at his family home near Stoke-on-Trent, in Staffordshire.

The inquest found a radiographer failed to highlight the growth of a cancerous tumor on the donor lungs.

Tests found that he had received the lungs of a donor who smoked up to 50 cigarettes a day, the inquest at North Staffordshire coroner's court heard.

The hospital said in the statement: "This is an extremely rare case. Papworth Hospital has a very strong track record of high quality outcomes and this is an extremely rare case.

"Patients who are accepted on to the transplant waiting list have no other option open to them, however, we must stress that all donor organs are screened rigorously prior to transplantation.

"Using lungs from donors who have smoked in the past is not unusual. During 2008/09 146 lung transplants were carried out in the UK.

"During the same period 84 people died on the waiting list. If we had a policy that said we did not use the lungs of those who had smoked, then the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower."

The tumor's growth was accelerated by the immuno-suppressive drugs Millington was taking to prevent his body rejecting the transplanted lungs, the inquest heard.

North Staffordshire coroner Ian Smith recorded that Millington, had died of "complications of transplant surgery and immuno-suppressive drug treatment."

NHS continues to surprise me.... I don't think America would do that
 
NHS FAIL.... :lol:

I don't think it was funny either.

NHS need consider about safety with lung transplant so I feel bad for this soldier.
 
Seems like a No Brainer to me. Don't use cancerous lungs. Or any cancerous organs for that matter. What are these people thinking?
 
but I don't understand why you like UK alot.

What does liking the UK have to do with the bad judgement of a hospital?

I like the UK too.

Here we have done the same. Alastair Cook is a famous person, whose cancerous bones were transplanted to patients and did harm.
 
This is just... wow, definitely absurd. I mean, isn't it their priority to ensure that a patient with a lung transplant to have a better lung?

Apparently it doesn't look like this way --

Papworth Hospital released a statement saying using donor lungs from smokers was not "unusual."

The statement added that the hospital had no option but to use lungs from smokers as "the number of lung transplants carried out would have been significantly lower," if they didn't.

It is obvious to me that this hospital were only worried about carrying out the number/quotas for transplants rather than to worry about the patient's condition to ensure that this said patient to receive non-cancerous organs.
 
well, are you saying that he should have been left to die without getting a transplant from a smoker?
 
well, are you saying that he should have been left to die without getting a transplant from a smoker?

sadly - yes. Just because he was given an extra year to live doesn't mean it was a great one year. He had to suffer even more with lung cancer. This is cruel and unethical - a false hope in life.

it's like giving a check of $5,000 to homeless person to have 2nd chance in life... and when he cashed it, it was bounced back. That's just mean.
 
What does liking the UK have to do with the bad judgement of a hospital?

I like the UK too.

Here we have done the same. Alastair Cook is a famous person, whose cancerous bones were transplanted to patients and did harm.

i do like UK but i dont like any hospital trust but i want trust hospital than failure..
 
Extremely stupid.

They should've made sure the lungs are healthy ENOUGH before donating them.

They should be fired for this screw up.
 
I hope it doesn't happen in America in the near future. :ugh:
 
Extremely stupid.

They should've made sure the lungs are healthy ENOUGH before donating them.

They should be fired for this screw up.

no no. it was LEGAL for them to use smoker's lungs for lung transplant. HORRIFYING!
 
I hope it doesn't happen in America in the near future. :ugh:

trust me. it won't. impossible since we're the most litigious country in the world.
 
^^ Is it legal to have UNhealthy donors ?
 
^^ Is it legal to have UNhealthy donors ?

nope. America has extremely strict guideline. no problem. that's why there's always organ shortage... all because of this guideline.
 
nope. America has extremely strict guideline. no problem. that's why there's always organ shortage... all because of this guideline.

I am sorry... I should have say this was for NHS, not our country. Is it legal to have UNhealthy donors in NHS ?

How much freedom of speech do they have in NHS ? I mean, are they strong enough to protest against it ?
 
I am sorry... I should have say this was for NHS, not our country. Is it legal to have UNhealthy donors in NHS ?

well - they wouldn't use unhealthy organs. although they do permit using smoker's lungs - they have to make sure it has no tumor/cancer/etc. But that's kinda oxymoronic, really...

How much freedom of speech do they have in NHS ? I mean, are they strong enough to protest against it ?
this has nothing to do with freedom of speech. and yes they can try to protest it.
 
Back
Top