Spirituality/Medicine Interface Project

Face Transplantation: The View from Harvard Medical School

Authors: Ziv M. Peled, MD, Julian J. Pribaz, MD, FRCS, FRACS

Abstract

The era of composite tissue allotransplantation (CTA) began with the first hand transplant in 1963.1 Not surprisingly, given the novelty of the field of transplantation at the time, the graft was rejected after only three weeks. Over the next several decades, improvements in immunosuppression and surgical technique enabled successful transplantation of multiple different solid organs including kidney, liver, pancreas, and heart. More recently (1998) a second hand transplant was performed, thus ushering in the modern era of CTA. As a result of this hand transplant and the 24 to date, heated ethical debates have arisen arguing the merits and risks of such experimental procedures. This debate has now begun anew and intensified with discussion of facial transplantation. This article represents our impressions of the ethical questions that have been raised regarding this novel procedure and our assessment on whether facial transplantation is a concept whose time has arrived.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1.Hettiaratchy S, Randolph MA, Petit F, et al. Composite tissue allotransplantation: a new era in plastic surgery? Br J Plast Surg 2004;57:381–391.
 
2.Francois CG, Breidenbach WC, Maldonado C, et al. Hand transplantation: comparisons and observations of the first four clinical cases. Microsurgery 2000;20:360–371.
 
3.Wiggins OP, Barker JH, Martinez S, et al. On the ethics of facial transplantation research. Am J Bioeth 2004;4:1–12.
 
4.Butler PE, Clarke A, Hettiaratchy S. Facial transplantation. BMJ 2005;331:1349–1350.
 
5.Mathew TH. A blinded, long-term, randomized multicenter study of mycophenolate mofetil in cadaveric renal transplantation: results at three years: Tricontinental Mycophenolate Mofetil Renal Transplantation Study Group. Transplantation 1998;65:1450–1454.
 
6.Rumsey N. Psychological aspects of face transplantation: read the small print carefully. Am J Bioeth2004;4:22–25.
 
7.Strong C. Should we be putting a good face on facial transplantation? Am J Bioeth 2004;4:13–14.
 
8.Butler PE, Clarke A, Ashcroft RE. Face transplantation: when and for whom? Am J Bioeth 2004;4:16–17.
 
9.Caplan A. Facing ourselves. Am J Bioeth 2004;4:18–20.
 
10.Petit F, Paraskevas A, Minns AB, et al. Face transplantation: where do we stand? Plast Reconstr Surg 2004;113:1429–1433.
 
11.Petit F, Paraskevas A, Lantieri L. A surgeon's perspective on the ethics of face transplantation. Am J Bioeth 2004;4:14–16.
 
12.Agich GJ, Siemionow M. Facing the ethical questions in facial transplantation. Am J Bioeth | 2004;4:25–27.
 
13.Pederson WC. We Can Do It! But Should We? American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery. Available at: http://www.microsurg.org/newsletters/fall2005.pdf. Autumn/Winter, 2005.