Review about the new practical clinical guideline 2019 of brain death in Mexico

Authors

  • Manuel Castillo-de la Cruz Hospital Christus Muguerza UPAEP. Puebla, México
  • M.E Barrientos-Núñez Servicios de Salud del Estado de Puebla. Puebla, México

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31157/an.v25i3.252

Keywords:

CPG 2019, brain death, observations, ANN 2010 criteria

Abstract

The National Center of Technological Excellence (CENETEC) provides us within the master catalog of Clinical Practice Guidelines GPC-SS-488-19, the new Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) that is now titled: Brain Death Diagnosis and Potential Management organ donor. With all the current evidence and recommendations that were reviewed by experts in the field, the guide that is titled Brain Death of the CPG 2011 is outdated.

The guide is intended for second and third level doctors of care and establishes that the diagnosis of brain death (BD) can be made by any doctor; however, this may not be so easy, even for the experts mentioned in the guide.

We consider it unfortunate to have excluded BD certification for the pediatric population from the new CPG and only focused on the adult population; This does not make it practical for the purpose of organ donation and transplantation in this age group. So, the 2011 Brain Death CPG will continue in this regard(1).

Having unified the theme of BD with the recommendations of the management of the potential donor favors that health professionals do not fall into the clinical nihilism of "not doing more for the patient with probable brain death" since the viability of the organs is compromised donated for transplant purposes; since not maintaining an adequate temperature, hemodynamic support and oxygenation acceptable in the donor cadaver, has fatal consequences on the viability of donated organs for transplants.

 

 

Published

2020-10-16

How to Cite

Castillo-de la Cruz, M., & Barrientos-Núñez , M. (2020). Review about the new practical clinical guideline 2019 of brain death in Mexico. Archivos De Neurociencias, 25(3), 79–84. https://doi.org/10.31157/an.v25i3.252

Issue

Section

Editorial