Reviving Organs, Redefining Death? The Ethical Controversy Over Normothermic Regional Perfusion

Needs Statement

Clinicians require targeted education to strengthen their understanding and application of bioethics and health policy in clinical practice. Many lack foundational knowledge of ethical principles, legal frameworks, and emerging policy issues, which limits their ability to recognize and respond to ethically complex situations. Even when aware of these issues, clinicians need support in developing structured reasoning skills, communicating effectively about sensitive topics, and navigating institutional constraints. This series aims to expand knowledge of foundational ethical principles and frameworks, current and emerging health policy issues, and content at the intersection of ethics, law, and clinical practice. This series will also enhance the ability of the learner to analyze complex ethical dilemmas using structured reasoning, communicate effectively about ethical and policy concerns with patients, families, and colleagues, and navigate institutional and systemic constraints with greater confidence and clarity. Ultimately, the goal is to translate knowledge and competence into improved clinical practice by fostering more ethically sound and policy-aware clinical decisions, increased advocacy for equitable and just healthcare practices, and a shift toward more holistic, patient-centered care that considers social, legal, and systemic factors.

Educational Objectives

At the conclusion of the activity, the participants should be able to:

• Define normothermic regional perfusion (NRP), distinguish its two forms, and explain why it is of interest to transplant surgeons and organ procurement organizations.
• Describe the ethical controversy surrounding NRP by outlining the main objections and the responses to those objections.
• Summarize proposed solutions to the controversy, focusing on decisions that can be made at the bedside and at the health policy level.

Target Audience

Activity Evaluation

Evaluation by questionnaire will address program content, presentation, and possible bias.

Educational Methods

• Lectures

Accreditation/Credit Designation

Baylor College of Medicine is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.

Baylor College of Medicine designates this enduring activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.

This activity has been designated by Baylor College of Medicine for 1.0 credit of education in medical ethics and/or professional responsibility.

Social Work: The Baylor College of Medicine Division of Continuing Professional Development (License Number 7270) is an approved continuing education provider for Social Workers through the Texas State Board of Social Worker Examiners. This activity has been approved for 1 continuing education unit.

Term of Approval

December 1, 2025 through December 31, 2027. Original release date: December 1, 2025.

Disclosure Policy

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM) is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education (CME) for physicians. BCM is committed to sponsoring CE activities that are scientifically based, accurate, current, and objectively presented.

In accordance with the ACCME Standards for Commercial Support, BCM has implemented a mechanism requiring everyone in a position to control the content of an educational activity (i.e., directors, planning committee members, faculty) to disclose any relevant financial relationships with commercial interests (drug/device companies) and manage/resolve any conflicts of interest prior to the activity. Individuals must disclose to participants the existence or non-existence of financial relationships at the time of the activity or within 24 months prior.

In addition, BCM has requested activity faculty/presenters to disclose to participants any unlabeled use or investigational use of pharmaceutical/device products; to use scientific or generic names (not trade names) in referring to products; and, if necessary to use a trade name, to use the names of similar products or those within a class. Faculty/presenters have also been requested to adhere to the ACCME's validation of clinical content statements.

BCM does not view the existence of financial relationships with commercial interests as implying bias or decreasing the value of a presentation. It is up to participants to determine whether the relationships influence the activity faculty with regard to exposition or conclusions. If at any time during this activity you feel that there has been commercial/promotional bias, notify the Activity Director or Activity Coordinator. Please answer the questions about balance and objectivity in the activity evaluation candidly.

All of the relevant financial relationships listed for these individuals have been mitigated.