JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

The Ethics of Hand Transplantation: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review to document ethical concerns regarding human upper extremity (UE) allotransplantation and how these concerns have changed over time.

METHODS: We performed a systematic review of 5 databases to find manuscripts addressing ethical concerns related to UE allotransplantation. Inclusion criteria were papers that were on the topic of UE allotransplantation, and related ethical concerns, written in English. We extracted and categorized ethical themes under the 4 principles of bioethics: Autonomy, Beneficence, Nonmaleficence, and Justice. We assessed theme frequency by publication year using Joinpoint regression, analyzing temporal trends, and estimating annual percent change.

RESULTS: We identified 474 citations; 49 articles were included in the final analysis. Publication years were 1998 to 2015 (mean, 3 publications/y; range, 0-7 publications/y). Nonmaleficence was most often addressed (46 of 49 papers; 94%) followed by autonomy (36 of 49; 74%), beneficence (35 of 49; 71%), and justice (31 of 49; 63%). Of the 14 most common themes, only "Need for More Research/Data" (nonmaleficence) demonstrated a significant increase from 1998 to 2002.

CONCLUSIONS: Upper extremity transplantation is an appealing reconstructive option for patients and physicians. Its life-enhancing (vs life-saving) nature and requirement for long-term immunosuppression have generated much ethical debate. Availability of human data has influenced ethical concerns over time. Our results indicate that discussion of ethical issues in the literature increased following publication of UE transplants and outcomes as well as after meetings of national societies and policy decisions by regulatory agencies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Because UE transplantation is not a life-saving procedure, much ethical debate has accompanied its evolution. It is important for UE surgeons considering referring patients for evaluation to be aware of this discussion to fully educate patients and help them make informed treatment decisions.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app