TY - JOUR
T1 - How reconstructive transplantation is different from organ transplantationand how it is not
AU - Hautz, T.
AU - Brandacher, G.
AU - Engelhardt, T. O.
AU - Pierer, G.
AU - Lee, W. P.A.
AU - Pratschke, J.
AU - Schneeberger, S.
PY - 2011/11/1
Y1 - 2011/11/1
N2 - An evolution of understanding and knowledge gained over more than 100 years in the field of solid organ transplantation (SOT) led to the first successful clinical cases of composite tissue allotransplantation. In many ways reconstructive transplantation (RT) is similar to SOT; however, certain characteristics make this novel type of transplantation unique, interesting, and challenging for both clinicians/scientists and patients. Currently, RT is a rapidly advancing multidisciplinary clinical reality. With over 100 clinical cases performed over the past 12 years, and encouraging early to midterm results, the relevance of RT for treatment of congenital and acquired tissue defects unsalvageable by conventional reconstruction is significant and holds great potential for the future. We herein report the extraordinary progress in this field with particular discussion of a comparative analysis of the similarities and differences regarding indications, end point, failure, patient and graft survival, and side effects between SOT and RT.
AB - An evolution of understanding and knowledge gained over more than 100 years in the field of solid organ transplantation (SOT) led to the first successful clinical cases of composite tissue allotransplantation. In many ways reconstructive transplantation (RT) is similar to SOT; however, certain characteristics make this novel type of transplantation unique, interesting, and challenging for both clinicians/scientists and patients. Currently, RT is a rapidly advancing multidisciplinary clinical reality. With over 100 clinical cases performed over the past 12 years, and encouraging early to midterm results, the relevance of RT for treatment of congenital and acquired tissue defects unsalvageable by conventional reconstruction is significant and holds great potential for the future. We herein report the extraordinary progress in this field with particular discussion of a comparative analysis of the similarities and differences regarding indications, end point, failure, patient and graft survival, and side effects between SOT and RT.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81455142644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81455142644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.08.044
DO - 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.08.044
M3 - Article
C2 - 22099830
AN - SCOPUS:81455142644
SN - 0041-1345
VL - 43
SP - 3504
EP - 3511
JO - Transplantation Proceedings
JF - Transplantation Proceedings
IS - 9
ER -