Is it feasible to use a large vessel patch with a uterine allograft en bloc for uterine transplantation?

Krishen Sieunarine, Nadey S. Hakim, David J. Corless, David E. Noakes, Laszlo Ungar, Giuseppe Del Priore, J. Richard Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Scopus citations

Abstract

Uterine auto-transplantation in the porcine model using a microvascular anastomotic technique failed because of gradual vessel thromboses. A macrovascular patch harvest with the uterus en bloc is probably less likely to undergo vessel thrombosis. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of an aortic/inferior vena caval vascular patch harvest with the uterus en bloc for uterine cross-transplantation purposes. A preserved human cadaver and freshly killed porcine and rabbit cadaveric models were used. The infrarenal aorta, inferior vena cava, common and internal iliac vessels and the uterine arterial and venous tree together with the uterus en bloc were successfully harvested intact as a large vessel patch and graft in both animal and human models. A macrovascular patch for uterine cross-transplantation is technically easy and feasible to harvest en bloc with the uterus in fresh cadaveric donors. This technique precludes live donors and makes cadaveric organ donation essential.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)257-261
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Surgery
Volume90
Issue number5
StatePublished - Dec 1 2005

Keywords

  • Female infertility
  • Macrovascular patch
  • Porcine model
  • Uterine transplantation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Is it feasible to use a large vessel patch with a uterine allograft en bloc for uterine transplantation?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Sieunarine, K., Hakim, N. S., Corless, D. J., Noakes, D. E., Ungar, L., Del Priore, G., & Smith, J. R. (2005). Is it feasible to use a large vessel patch with a uterine allograft en bloc for uterine transplantation? International Surgery, 90(5), 257-261.