Evidence boundary These are external pig kidney transplant studies. Neither tested BHOC or an oxygen-carrier perfusate.
Two cases, 54 hours
Results of Two Cases of Pig-to-Human Kidney Xenotransplantation ↗Montgomery RA, Stern JM, Lonze BE, et al. · Published 19 May 2022
- Research model
- Two people with established brain death received genetically modified pig kidney xenografts.
- Observed
- The grafts produced urine. During 54 hours, biopsies showed no evidence of hyperacute or antibody-mediated rejection.
- What this cannot show
- Durable graft function, long-term safety or outcomes in living recipients. PubMed record ↗
One case, 61 days
Physiology and immunology of a pig-to-human decedent kidney xenotransplant ↗Montgomery RA, Stern JM, Fathi F, et al. · Online 13 November 2025; issue 5 February 2026
- Research model
- One person with established brain death received a gene-edited pig kidney. Observation continued for 61 days.
- Observed
- The report describes dialysis independence. Antibody-mediated rejection developed on day 33 and was reported as reversed after treatment.
- What this cannot show
- The 61 days were not rejection-free. One decedent study cannot establish long-term outcomes in living recipients or be compared directly with the 2022 study. PubMed record ↗
Nature corrections
Two correction notices amend the Nature article. They are not additional studies.
The publisher notice corrects figure-axis units and an IgG label to IgM. Use the corrected version when reading those figures.
A separate question about organ support
Neither study answers whether a characterized oxygen carrier could support kidney graft function during ex-vivo preparation. That question would need its own protocol, comparator, organ-specific endpoints and safety assessment. Xenograft findings are not evidence of BHOC efficacy in recipients.
Sources and review scope
- Montgomery et al., NEJM (2022): doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2120238 ↗.
- Montgomery et al., Nature (online 2025; issue 2026): doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09847-6 ↗.
- Publisher Correction ↗ and Author Correction ↗ (2026).
This is an editorial summary of publication records, abstracts and correction notices. It is not a systematic review or an analysis of raw data. Evidence method ↗