ArticleClinical kidney journal2022
Practical ethical concerns in allocation of pig kidneys to humans.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Porcine xenotransplantation in the clinical era: converging advances and unresolved barriers on the path to clinical translation - a narrative review.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- A tipping point for kidney xenotransplantation.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Kidney and Bladder Transplantation: Advances, Barriers, and Emerging Solutions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Strategies of Bladder Reconstruction after Partial or Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer.Molecular biotechnology · 2025Review
- Ethics, virtues and xenotransplantation.Perfusion · 2024Review
- Advancing kidney xenotransplantation with anesthesia and surgery - bridging preclinical and clinical frontiers challenges and prospects.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Kidney xenotransplantation: Future clinical reality or science fiction?Nursing & health sciences · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The fundamental ethical question of whether pig organs should be transplanted into humans has been settled, as recent surgeries demonstrating proof of concept demonstrate. Other issues need to be considered and reconciled before xenotransplantation of pig kidneys becomes a solution to the organ shortage for people waiting for a kidney transplant or as a viable alternative to the deceased donor or living donor human kidneys. Human trials will be needed beyond brain-dead individuals to show that xenotransplantation is safe from immunologic and infectious standpoints. Transplant centers will need to show that xenotransplantation provides a long-term benefit to recipients and is financially viable. If trials are successful and receive regulatory approval, pig xenotransplants may become another option for people waiting for a kidney. Before patients are discharged with a functioning xenograft, practical issues with ethical implications remain.
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.