| Abstract: | Due to the unfortunate epidemic of opioid overdose deaths among people who inject drugs (PWID) in North America, there has been an increase in the availability of hepatitis C (HCV)‐positive organs for transplantation and consequently the potential to decrease waiting times for solid organ transplantation if an HCV‐uninfected recipient is willing to accept an HCV‐positive donor. The confidence in this potential new strategy comes as a result of the advent of safe and highly effective pan‐genotypic direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs). This promising strategy has been the most widely studied in kidney transplantation. Liver transplantation has positive results preliminarily, but has even less available data because viable HCV‐infected donor livers are typically transplanted into HCV‐infected individuals. Further, while HCV‐infected heart and lung transplantation, which face additional post‐transplant issues, have shown encouraging results, these studies are small scale and are limited by short‐term follow‐up. Thus, it would be premature to implement this strategy as standard of care without large scale clinical and real‐world trials and longer‐term follow‐up studies. Further, the ethics of this practice need to be considered. While some transplant professionals argue that more harm will be done by not utilizing HCV‐infected organs, others contend that cautiously conducted multi‐centre studies involving extensive post‐transplant follow‐up are paramount prior to endorsing widespread implementation of this strategy. The ethical permissibility of this practice hinges on whether access to DAA therapy can be secured in advance, and prospective recipients understand and accept all the risks associated with acquiring HCV. |
