ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022
Uterus Transplantation: Revisiting the Question of Deceased Donors versus Living Donors for Organ Procurement.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uterus transplantation: an ethical analysis.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2026Review
- Restoration of Reproductive Function in Uterine Factor Infertility: Clinical Evaluation of Uterus Transplantation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Life from death: ethical implications of uterus transplantation from deceased donors in global health.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Uterus Transplantation from Deceased Donors: First Italian Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Living-Donor Uterus Transplantation: A Clinical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Awareness and Interest in Uterus Transplantation over Time: Analysis of Those Seeking Surgical Correction for Uterine-Factor Infertility in the US.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Uterus transplantation is a surgical treatment for women with congenital or acquired uterine factor infertility. While uterus transplantation is a life-enhancing transplant that is commonly categorized as a vascular composite allograft (e.g., face or hand), it is similar to many solid organ transplants (e.g., kidney) in that both living donors (LDs) and deceased donors (DDs) can be utilized for organ procurement. While many endpoints appear to be similar for LD and DD transplants (including graft survival, time to menses, livebirth rates), there are key medical, technical, ethical, and logistical differences between these modalities. Primary considerations in favor of a LD model include thorough screening of donors, enhanced logistics, and greater donor availability. The primary consideration in favor of a DD model is the lack of physical or psychological harm to a living donor. Other important factors, that may not clearly favor one approach over the other, are important to include in discussions of LD vs. DD models. We favor a stepwise approach to uterus transplantation, one in which programs first begin with DD procurement before attempting LD procurement to maximize successful organ recovery and to minimize potential harms to a living donor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.