That's Fit

10 hours. Six operating rooms. Nine surgical teams. And six new kidneys.

Johns Hopkins surgeons performed six simultaneous kidney transplants -- a surgery believed to be the first of its kind. Five of the six transplant candidates had family members willing to donate a kidney, but were incompatible for their family member. When a sixth donor -- an altruistic donor who was willing to donate to anyone in need -- stepped in, the final necessary piece of the puzzle was found. The others who were willing to donate may not have been a match for their family member, but they were matches for others who were waiting for a transplant. The surgeries were successful, and the lead surgeon reports that all donors and transplant recipients are doing well.

While most donated kidneys come from deceased donors, live donors are preferred because the success rates are higher. The six patients in this series of operations were matched through a live donor matching system created by Johns Hopkins.

It takes a moment to string the facts together so that they make sense: A woman is suing PetSmart for their role in her husband's death, because they sold another (unnamed) woman a sick hamster.

The woman who owned the sick hamster, which had something called LCMV, died of a stroke. Her liver was transplanted into Nancy Magee's husband, Thomas. Thomas died a month later from the contaminated liver, as did two other organ recipients. Another became seriously ill, but recovered. Now Nancy Magee is suing the pet superstore for selling the pet in the first place.

In most healthy people, LCMV is a mild infection that clears up on its own and can be prevented by good hand washing hygiene after holding a rodent pet. Pregnant woman should not hold rodent pets, as LCMV can be passed on to the fetus and cause serious problems. Immuno-suppressed patients, like the organ recipients in this story, are at a higher risk of complications from the infection.

How sad that such an unselfish gift was complicated in this way. My heart goes out to the families.

It's always unfortunate to hear that an organ donation recipient ends up having HIV due to the donor being a high-risk donor. Do patients need to do more due diligence before accepting organ donations?

That's a question with high emotional and ethical considerations. But, if a recipient accepted an organ that would continue giving the opportunity to live -- but possibly live with a disease that would be complicated to manage -- some may ask if it's even worth it in the first place.

Although transmission of HIV through organ donation is extremely rare in the U.S. (a recent case in Chicago was the first since 1986), there are still hard questions to answer here. What kind of research would you do if you required an organ donation? Any?