February 11, 2009 3:10 PM

Teen Organ Donor's Gift Turns Tragic

By
Nancy Cordes
(CBS)  Fifteen-year-old Alex Koehne died suddenly last year from what doctors thought was Meningitis.

"He said, 'Mommy, am I going to die?', and I said, 'No baby, they're going to make you all better,' his mother, Lisa Koehne remembers.

CBS News correspondent Nancy Cordes reports his devastated parents took some solace in knowing that his death would give others new life. His mother says organ donation is very important to the family. "Alex always knew what he wanted."

Alex's liver went to a 52-year-old man. His pancreas to a 36-year-old woman. His kidneys went to two different men, one 46 and the other 64.

A month later, an autopsy revealed that Alex never had meningitis. He had a rare and fast-moving lymphoma cancer -- one that was now working its way through the bodies of four other people.

The organs were removed, but the lymphoma already had killed the recipients of his liver and pancreas. The two kidney patients had the kidneys removed and survived. They're now undergoing chemotherapy.

"When we found out that they died, our hearts went out to them," Koehne says tearfully.

"It's a very, very rare event," says Dr. Lewis Teperman, director of transplantation at New York University Medical Center, where two of the four organs ended up.

He co-authored an article about the case in the American Journal of Transplantation to warn other doctors.

"We're alerting people to the fact that if someone calls a death from bacterial meningitis and there is no bacteria, we're saying, you know what, let's back off for a little bit and reconsider whether we're going to use these organs," Teperman says.

Alex's hospital and the donor network responsible for the health of the organs won't do interviews about the case. But in a statement, the donor network urged potential donors not to "allow the horrible circumstances surrounding this rare case to affect their decision to sign the donor registry," which every year gives 22,000 people a second chance at life.

Medical privacy rules may prevent the family from ever knowing the names of the people who died. Now, Alex's parents want to keep others from suffering a similar fate.

Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
  • Nancy Cordes

    Nancy Cordes is CBS News' congressional correspondent.

Add a Comment See all 43 Comments
by cav60 April 4, 2008 4:06 PM EDT
Just a little story Iwould like to share. In 1987 I received a renal transplant in North Carolina. I faired very well for two years. Then out of the blue my doctors called me in for a speacil visit. At that time I was told that the other receipients had developed cancer from the organs which they had received. I was completly overwhelmed to say the least. At that point I went through a number of scans. Remember Ihave had this organ for two years. At that point there were no tumors. Then I waited for the worse, which came within three months.I noticed a difficulty in swallowing only to find out that I had a tumorin my throat. Also at that time I had a large lump on my left inside forearm. I went for more scans only to find a large number of sub-contaneous tumors.Although I did not have to go through any type of chemotherpy my kidney was removed.My body went through a frenzy that Iwish to and do not remember.After a number of scans within a nine month period I was cancer free,I was and still amazed this happened in this period of medicine. My next three years were on dialysis before receiving another renal transplant. I am now doing well as far as my renal function is concern. My heart goes out to all the famlies invoved in this latest incident.May God bless.thank you for time.
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 3, 2008 12:21 PM EDT
Blood tests cannot detect cancer." Posted by indignant10

Well, they are detecting something in the blood that causes them to think that there is cancer because I know of many people where the doctor has said that they figured they had cancer from that blood test and they then ordered further tests. They all had cancer.

Posted by erasmus6 at 09:12 PM : Apr 02, 2008


Particularly for blood related cancers, there can be anomalies in the blood such as deformed red blood cells or a very high white blood cell count (or very, very low) that can then lead to other tests)

Blood tests are often the first indicator in the body that a pathogen of some sort is present. The amount of WBC increases dramatically in the presence of diseases and deformed rbc indicate there may be something going on within the bone marrow of the patient. This often turns out to be a type of leukemia. Further, problems with the lymph may be indicative of potential lymphomas. For diagnostic purposes, early indications may start with a blood test. Excellent point.
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 3, 2008 12:17 PM EDT
According to your logic you would be fine with having some company open a magazine subscription in your name because they think you would enjoy it and then require you to write them back to indicate that, no, you really don''''t want the subscription. Next a union automatically enrolls you because of your profession and you have to write them to tell them you don''''t want to be part of their union. See where I''''m going with this? Same thing for it being incumbent on you to tell the organ donation folks that you don''''t want to be an organ donor. Once again let me emphasize that I agree with organ donation, just not that it be mandatory or even assumed.

Posted by rational_1 at 02:25 PM : Apr 02, 2008


Excellent point: our bodies are NOT the property of the state and should not be used for good or evil without express permission from the potential donor. To assume otherwise is to open the possibility of people being killed early or compromised so that their organs can be used. I want to be cremated with my family present to witness that my body actually is cremated . If people are "forced" to donate (like the UK is trying to do) they may deliberately harm their bodies to render them unusable.
Reply to this comment
by b-easy63 April 3, 2008 12:14 PM EDT
They test blood before it is given so you would think that they could somehow test these organs before they are given. There is the good old Xray machine, they can do a biopsy and also a blood test alone should tell of any infections or cancer. You would think after the disaster with blood they would have learned their lesson.

Posted by erasmus6 at 12:15 PM : Apr 02, 2008

all organs are supposed to be tested and those harvested from people who die from any known pathogen have to be tested specifically for that pathogen as well as others. There may be a law suit in here somewhere. It appears that neither the hospitals nor the donor bank tested these organs properly.

These are not the only deadly diseases passed on through tissue/organ donation. IN the 1990s there were quite a few cases of CJK disease as well as instances of Mad Cow disease due to transplants. Both are deadly. All organs are supposed to be screened and even if coming from a supposedly "healthy" donor, genetic as well as histology info has to be analyzed.

There is the impression that in the rush to get and use a match, Doctors and hospitals are not conducting the tests and screening as they should.

Reply to this comment
by hempstead7 April 3, 2008 2:31 AM EDT
The one thing I have learned through my health issues is that if we challenge the media to read our comments, then changes might happen. If we all band together to ask for a supportive ear to express what our experiences and knowlege have led us to believe, I would think this rationale might prompt some interest.
Reply to this comment
by hempstead7 April 3, 2008 2:07 AM EDT
Lack of answers lead to more major questions.........
Reply to this comment
by hempstead7 April 3, 2008 2:06 AM EDT
I''m a big fan of CNN......who is financing the "Autism Day" ?..........
Reply to this comment
by hempstead7 April 3, 2008 2:03 AM EDT
Why was my comment not aired? You need to acknowledge comments good or bad.
Reply to this comment
by erasmus6 April 3, 2008 12:12 AM EDT
"Blood tests cannot detect cancer." Posted by indignant10

Well, they are detecting something in the blood that causes them to think that there is cancer because I know of many people where the doctor has said that they figured they had cancer from that blood test and they then ordered further tests. They all had cancer.
Reply to this comment
by spinern70 April 2, 2008 8:30 PM EDT
I am sorry that this family not only had to lose their precious son, but is now dealing with the lymphome issue.

It appears that a meningitis donor is a questionable donor anyway. What type of meningitis was it, tuberculosis, viral, bacterial etc...?

I personally think it is a wake up call to incorporate more testing prior to transplantation. What else are we passing on? Melanoma, dormant HIV etc.

I sure hope there are no legal ramifications towards the family for their generous gesture. These things happen and lessons are learned. Process improvement!
Reply to this comment
See all 43 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook