ReviewCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2026
Porcine-derived materials in urology Practical ethical guidance for caring for Muslim and Jewish patients.
Review in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPorcine-derived materials are used widely in urology, including hemostatic agents, acellular dermal matrices, sutures, bulking agents, and several anticoagulant medications. Although clinically effective, their animal origin is rarely discussed during preoperative counseling or routine prescribing. For many patients whose religious or ethical values influence medical decision-making, this information is meaningful even when use is permitted. Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) and Jewish law (Halakhah) generally allow porcine-derived medical products when medically necessary, but many patients prefer transparent disclosure and the opportunity to consider alternatives when they exist. The central issue is supporting patient autonomy through clear, value-neutral communication.
methodsWe conducted a narrative review of porcine-derived devices and medications commonly used in urologic practice and summarized relevant ethical considerations from Islamic and Jewish perspectives, with a focus on practical implications for informed consent and shared decision-making.
resultsAcross urologic practice, porcine collagen and gelatin are most frequently encountered in hemostatic sealants, acellular dermal matrices, biologic slings, absorbable sutures, and select pharmaceutical excipients. Clinically viable non-porcine or synthetic alternatives are available in many, but not all, settings. Product origin is inconsistently disclosed in labeling, often requiring verification through manufacturer documentation or pharmacy resources when disclosure is relevant to patient preferences.
conclusionsTransparent, value-neutral counseling regarding porcine-derived materials supports patient autonomy, reduces moral distress, and may mitigate medicolegal risk when product origin is important to patients. Routine awareness of commonly used porcine-derived products, coupled with reliable verification of material composition and discussion of alternatives when feasible, allows urologists to provide care that is both clinically effective and aligned with diverse patient values.
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.