ReviewCell transplantation
Future Systems of Xenotransplantation: Melding Historical and Bioethical Methodology.
Review in Cell transplantation. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Redefining post-xenotransplantation surveillance: leveraging metagenomic next-generation sequencing to discriminate true pathogen replication from microchimerism-induced false positives.Clinical transplantation and research · 2026Review
- Kidney and Bladder Transplantation: Advances, Barriers, and Emerging Solutions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Alternative Therapies in Transplantology as a Promising Perspective in Medicine.Annals of transplantation · 2024Review
- Chimeric Livers: Interspecies Blastocyst Complementation and Xenotransplantation for End-Stage Liver Disease.Hepatic medicine : evidence and research · 2024Review
- The Jewish Perspectives on Xenotransplantation.Rambam Maimonides medical journal · 2023Article
- A milestone in liver xenotransplantation: The first 10-gene-edited pig-to-living-human auxiliary transplantation and the road ahead.Cell transplantationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The future of xenotransplantation is promising. However, the scientific process behind xenotransplantation, shown through the methodology of history and bioethics, involves stakeholders beyond the laboratory. We present three short vignettes, the history of a 20th-century pioneer in solid organ transplantation, the xenoheart received by David Bennett, and a global system of illegal organ procurement, to highlight the complexity of biomedical practice. Current solid organ transplantation systems are seemingly unsustainable and ineffective in satisfying a growing global demand for organs. Despite the shortcomings of current systems, we argue that the discourse surrounding xenotransplantation science is insufficient to construct a long-lasting and equitable replacement for solid organ transplantation. Xenotransplantation is more than a surgical technique, an interdisciplinary health concern, or a biomedical technology-it is deeply dependent on a series of cultural, historical, and social factors. Incorporating a greater variety of perspectives and disciplines into ongoing discussions of xenotransplantation science, while potentially frustrating in the short term, will act to maximize its potential as a paradigm-shifting science.
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.