Transplantation continues to push the frontiers of medicine into domains that summon forth troublesome ethical questions. Looming on the frontier today is human facial transplantation. We develop criteria that, we maintain, must be satisfied in order to ethically undertake this as-yet-untried transplant procedure. We draw on the criteria advanced by Dr. Francis Moore in the late 1980s for introducing innovative procedures in transplant surgery. In addition to these we also insist that human face transplantation must meet all the ethical requirements usually applied to health care research. We summarize the achievements of transplant surgery to date, focusing in particular on the safety and efficacy of immunosuppressive medications. We also emphasize the importance of risk/benefit assessments that take into account the physical, aesthetic, psychological, and social dimensions of facial disfiguration, reconstruction, and transplantation. Finally, we maintain that the time has come to move facial transplantation research into the clinical phase.

Summary Each year an estimated 7‐million people in the USA need composite tissue reconstruction because of surgical excision of tumors, accidents and congenital malformations. Limb amputees alone comprise over 1.2 million of these. This figure is more than double the number of solid organs needed for transplantation. Composite tissue allotransplantation in the form of hand and facial tissue transplantation are now a clinical reality. The discovery, in the late 1990s, that the same immunotherapy used routinely in kidney transplantation was also effective in preventing skin rejection made this possible. While these new treatments seem like major advancements most of the surgical, immunological and ethical methods used are not new at all and have been around and routinely used in clinical practice for some time. In this review of composite tissue allotransplantation, we: (i) outline the limitations of conventional reconstructive methods for treating severe facial disfigurement, (ii) review the history of composite tissue allotransplantation, (iii) discuss the chronological scientific advances that have made it possible, (iv) focus on the two unique clinical scenarios of hand and face transplantation, and (v) reflect on the critical issues that must be addressed as we move this new frontier toward becoming a treatment in mainstream medicine.

We demonstrated that participating in a microsurgical training course results in significant improvement in objectively assessed microvascular surgical skills. The degree of skills improvement was strongly correlated with psychomotor aptitude assessments scores for male trainees.

No abstract

Composite-tissue allotransplantation (CTA) is a new therapeutic modality to reconstruct major tissue defects of the face, larynx, and extremities. Unlike most life-saving organ-transplantation procedures, CTA is considered to improve quality of life. Therefore, the question arises, do the risks posed by the immunosuppression drugs that patients must take to prevent rejection justify the benefits of these procedures? The purpose of this study was to assess the relative risk that individuals are willing to accept in order to receive the benefits of CTA procedures. We used a psychometrically reliable and valid instrument to question two primary populations of individuals: those who live with the risks of immunosuppression, and healthy individuals. The level of risk acceptance for the seven transplant procedures tested (foot, single hand, double hand, larynx, kidney, hemiface, and full face) showed significant differences in research participants' risk acceptance for the different transplant procedures, but no significant differences between groups. Based on these findings, we conclude that certain CTA procedures convey benefits to recipients that are perceived by subjects, including individuals who live with the risks of immunosuppression, to warrant the risks of these procedures.