Palavras-chave
bioética
paro cardiaco
ética
Como Citar
Resumo
Con base en los malos resultados de la reanimación cardiopulmonar, hace más de tres décadas se adoptaron en la práctica clínica las órdenes de no reanimación. De manera más actual y dado el desarrollo de las garantías individuales y su adopción en la práctica clínica, se entiende por órdenes de no reanimación las decisiones concertadas entre los médicos y sus pacientes o representantes de no ser sometidos a una reanimación cardiocerebropulmonar en el evento de sufrir un paro cardiaco.
Poco a poco se ha ido aceptando la definición de límites en la actividad asistencial en consideración a sus resultados ulteriores en la vida de las personas; sin embargo, aún no es clara la compatibilidad de este tipo de decisiones —calificadas como restrictivas— en pacientes que necesitan algún tipo de tratamiento. El objetivo de este artículo es establecer el marco conceptual de este dilema y ofrecer una respuesta sobre la formulación, consecuencias e implicaciones de una orden de no reanimación.
Mohr M, Kettler D. Ethical aspects of resuscitation.
Br J Anaesth. 1997;79:253-9.
McBrien M, Heyburn G. Do not attempt
resuscitation orders in the peri-operative
period. Anaesthesia. 2006;61:625-7.
Gempeler F. Reanimación cardiopulmonar
más allá de la técnica. Rev Col Anestesiol.
;43:142-6.
Angus DC. Successful resuscitation from
in-hospital cardiac arrest: What happens
next? JAMA. 2015;314:1238-9.
Fendler TJ, Spertus JA, Kennedy KF,
Chen LM, Perman SM, Chan PS. Alignment
of do-not-resuscitate status with
patients’ likelihood of favorable neurological
survival after in-hospital cardiac
arrest. JAMA. 2015;314:1264-71.
Link MS, Berkow LC, Kudenchuk PJ,
Halperin HR, Hess EP, Moitra VK, et
al. Part 7: Adult advanced cardiovascular life support: 2015 American Heart
Association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary
resuscitation and emergency
cardiovascular care. Circulation.
;132(suppl 2):S444-64.
British Medical Association, Resuscitation
Council (UK) and Royal College of
Nursing. Decisions relating to cardiopulmonary
resuscitation [internet]. London;
October 2014. Disponible en: http://bma.
org.uk/-/media/files/pdfs/práctical %20
advice %20at %20work/ethics/decisionsrelatingresusreport.
Gill R. Decisions relating to cardiopulmonary
resuscitation: commentary 1:
CPR and the cost of autonomy. J Med
Ethics. 2001;27:317-8.
Monzon JL, Saralegui R, Molina R,
Abizanda R, Cruz Martín M, Cabré L,
et al. Ética de las decisiones en resucitación
cardiopulmonar. Med Intensiva.
;34:534-49.
Guarisco KK. Managing do-not-resuscitate
orders in the peri anesthesia period. J
Perianesth Nurs. 2004;19:300-7.
Van Norman G. Do-not-resuscitate orders
during anaesthesia and urgent procedures
[internet]. 1998. Disponible en:
http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/
dnrau.html
Fritz Z, Fuld J. Ethical issues surrounding
do not attempt resuscitation orders: decisions,
discussion and deleterious effects.
J Med Ethics. 2010;36:593-7.
Association of Anaesthetists of Great
Britain and Ireland. Do Not Attempt
Resuscitation (DNAR) decisions in the
perioperative period [internet]. London;
Disponible en: http://www.aagbi.
org/sites/default/files/dnar_09_0.pdf
Rothenburg D. Informed refusal-DNR
orders in the patient undergoing anesthesia
and surgery at the end-of-life. In:
Van Norman G, editor. Clinical ethics in
anaesthesiology: A case based textbook.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
p. 13-8.
Knipe M. Hardman JG. Past, present,
and future of ‘Do not attempt resuscitation’
orders in the perioperative period.
Br J Anaesth. 2013;111(6):861-3. doi:
1093/bja/aet287.
Burns JP, Edwards J, Johnson J, Cassem
NH, Truog RD. Do-not resuscitate
order after 25 years. Crit Care Med.
;31:1543-50.
Cereceda L. Orden de no reanimar, consideraciones
sobre este problema. Rev
Med Clin Condes. 2011;22:369-76.
Sentencia C-239/1997, homicidio por
piedad: elementos/homicidio pietístico o
eutanásico/homicidio eugenésico [internet].
Corte Constitucional colombiana.
Disponible en: http://www.corteconstitucional.
gov.co/relatoria/1997/c-239-97.
htm
Sentencia T-659/2012, derecho a la
educación [internet]. Corte Constitucional
colombiana. Disponible en:
http://www.corteconstitucional.gov.co/
relatoria/2002/T-659-02.htm
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights.
Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.