ReviewInternational journal of reproductive biomedicine2023
Differences between living and deceased donation in human uterus transplantation: A narrative review.
Review in International journal of reproductive biomedicine, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global transplantation: Lessons from organ transplantation organizations worldwide.World journal of transplantation · 2025Review
- Hypothermic machine perfusion in uterus transplantation in a porcine model: A proof of concept and the first results in graft preservation.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Uterine Transplant Optimization From a Preclinical Donor Model With Controlled Cardiocirculatory Arrest.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- Uterus Transplantation from Deceased Donors: First Italian Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Deceased Donor Uterus Transplantation: A Narrative Review of the First 24 Published Cases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Living-Donor Uterus Transplantation: A Clinical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The decision to use a living or deceased donor to perform uterus transplantation (UTx) is an evaluation of benefit and harm and is based on the medical team's choices. The current study determines the differences between living and deceased donation in human UTx according to determinant factors in choosing the donor type. For this review study, the PubMed database was searched without time, language, and location limitations up to May 2022. From 113 identified articles, 45 papers were included in the study for review. According to the results, in comparison to living donation, the biggest advantage of deceased donation is the lack of surgical and or psychological risks for the donor. In contrast, a comprehensive pre-transplantation medical assessment is less possible in deceased donation, and preplanned surgery cannot be realized. According to published peer-reviewed clinical trials on UTx, the graft failure rates in living and deceased donor UTx are 21% and 36%, respectively. Supposing all recipients who did not have graft failure underwent embryo transfer, live birth rates in living and deceased donor UTx procedures are almost 63% and 71%, respectively. Currently, considering the occurrence of live births from both donations, particularly from nulliparous deceased donor, increased demand for UTx in the near future, shortage of uterus grafts, and lack of sufficient data for a comprehensive comparison between the 2 types of donation, the use of both donations still seems necessary and rational.
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.