Introduction  

The “First Successful Kidney Transplant” by Murray and Merrill in 1954 marked an evolution in the treatment of organ failure through organ transplantation, which remains one of the crowning achievements of modern medical innovation [1, 2]. Even though there has been a considerable advancement in overcoming organ transplant rejection, complications caused due to immunosuppression, and shortage of available organs pose additional difficulties [3, 4]. This literature study analyzes contemporary scientific research in medicine centers on the recently developed methods as well as emerging concepts in the field of transplantation medicine with the hopes of identifying potential innovations capable of transformative therapeutic shifts and transformative moves [5, 6]. Because of the evolving scenarios considering the historical time scale of transplantation, there is a need to rethink and reassess treatment strategies. While the groundwork was set with the pioneering research in 1954, present hurdles demand many novel features. Medawar's 1948 investigation into “Immunity to Homologous Grafted Skin” illustrates the need for additional research due to the complexity surrounding immune system responses [7]. The current investigation attempts to analyze the body of recent literature, identify gaps in understanding, and analyze new lines of research. Assessing and evaluating the ever-changing therapeutic landscapes that Hal-loran et al. mention is an important exercise in their understanding of how new therapies are developed [8].

To address the problems associated with transplants and the concerns with immunosuppression, these therapeutic approaches are geared toward resolving the problems. The increasing disparity, in many countries, between individuals who need (or are waiting to undergo) renal transplants and those receiving the procedure is due to the introduction of Cyclosporine A and other potent immunosuppressive agents, such as calcineurin inhibitors, Tacrolimus [9].

Innovative strategies for coping with the challenges of graft rejection and immunosuppression are critical for the advancement of transplant medicine [10, 11]. This calls for the fundamental change needed to solve the problem of employing novel methods to deal with the problem of immune suppression [12, 13].

Historical perspective on transplantation therapies

1954:

• First Successful Kidney Transplant: Dr. Joseph Murray performed the first successful kidney transplant, earning the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.
• Living Donations: Begin to gain prominence, with individuals donating kidneys and liver segments, increasing the organ pool and improving outcomes.

1967: First Successful Heart Transplant: Dr. Christiaan Barnard performed the pioneering heart transplant [14].

1980s:

• Breakthroughs in Liver and Lung Transplantation: Significant advancements broaden transplantation possibilities [15].
• Advancements in Tissue Typing and Compatibility Testing: Improve success rates of grafts.

1983: Introduction to Cyclosporine: An Immune Modulatory Medication that is Critical for Managing Immunological Responses Following Organ Transplantation.

1990s:

• Cardiocirculatory Death (DCD) Donations: The use of organs from DCD donors increases the number of available organs.
• Normothermic Regional Perfusion (NRP): Enhances the viability and quality of organs retrieved from DCD donors, particularly for liver and abdominal transplants.

1996: ABO-Incompatible Transplantation: Advanced immunosuppressive and desensitization techniques make transplants across different blood types more viable.

2011: Minimally Invasive and Robotic Techniques: These advancements aim to reduce recovery times, decrease surgical risks, and improve precision during transplant surgeries, particularly in kidney and pancreas transplants.

In conclusion, the history of transplantation therapy has been characterized by important turning points, continuous attempts to enhance the treatment, and difficulties that have improved the techniques employed. Without an understanding of this history, it would be difficult to appreciate the circumstances that drive the constant evolution of therapeutic approaches in transplantation medicine.

Overview of current transplantation therapies

In the modern era of transplant medicine, organ transplants, tissue and cellular transplants, immunosuppression, and the management of complications like Graft-Versus-Host Disease (GVHD) are all integrated into one system. 

Cellular therapy can potentially improve outcomes for organ transplant patients. Cells with a wide range of immunoregulatory and regenerative functions can be employed in certain cases of transplant rejection or post-surgical injury. While preliminary efficacy evaluations have begun, early clinical studies have shown the safety of certain treatments, and research on animal models has validated the viability of cell therapy. Enhanced organ donation processes, refined surgical techniques, assessment of immunological risk factors, use of immunosuppressive drugs, and post-operative monitoring of graft functions have sharply increased recipient survival rates. The domain still faces challenges that require careful control of immune balance to avoid rejection while sidestepping overzealous immunosuppression. The most powerful tolerance induction technique is mixed chimerism, but other approaches, such as regulatory T cell transfer and using immune suppressor dendritic cells, have shown promise in preclinical research. Recent studies suggest that operational tolerance can be achieved with some kidneys and livers under specific conditions.

In the future, advancements in transplantation will likely be influenced by tolerance because of the progress in clinical trials and a better understanding of the immunodulatory factors involved.

ABO-incompatible transplantation, where the donor and recipient have different blood types, has become viable due to advancements in immunosuppressive and desensitization techniques. These include therapies like Rituximab, plasmapheresis, and IVIG, which reduce antibody levels and prevent rejection. Despite challenges such as the risk of antibody-mediated rejection and the need for intensive care, ABO-incompatible transplantation significantly increases the donor pool, offering life-saving options for patients who may otherwise not find compatible donors.

Imlifidase, an enzyme derived from the bacterium Streptococcus pyogenes, has shown promise in treating highly sensitized patients awaiting organ transplantation, who often have pre-formed antibodies against donor organs, significantly increasing the risk of rejection. Imlifidase works by cleaving Immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies at the hinge region, reducing circulating IgG levels and diminishing the antibody-mediated immune response that leads to organ rejection. It effectively desensitizes patients, increasing transplant eligibility and improving outcomes for kidney, heart, and lung transplants. However, its effects are temporary, requiring careful post-transplant management and continued immunosuppression. The treatment poses infection risks, is costly, and needs more long-term studies to confirm its efficacy and safety.

This section is aimed at describing the current therapeutic modalities, including their successes and failures (Table 1).

In a groundbreaking 2022 study, NYU Langone Health successfully conducted a two-month trial of a genetically modified pig kidney transplanted into a brain-dead human. This xenotransplant involved a single gene modification to eliminate alpha-gal, a molecule responsible for rapid rejection in humans. The trial also utilized the pig's thymus gland to help prevent delayed immune responses. Despite some mild rejection, which was managed with increased immunosuppression, the results were promising, indicating potential for future applications in living human patients.

Though challenges persist, transplantation therapy has made remarkable strides. As is evident from the increasing rates of transplant survival and the patients’ enhanced quality of life, much progress has been achieved.

Emerging paradigms in transplantation therapeutics

The initiation of new paradigms in the innovative blossoming field of transplantation therapeutics is marked by distinct refinement in advanced immunomodulation, organ gene editing, preservation techniques, biomaterials, precision medicine [25], and even the integration of artificial intelligence [26-29] (Table 2).

In conclusion, the study of novel approaches in transplantation therapeutics signifies an important milestone in innovative precision. From leveraging the capabilities of gene editing to the fusion of AI and biomaterials, these developments have the potential to resolve some of the most persistent issues and redefine the landscape of challenges in transplantation medicine.

Novel cellular therapies

By offering innovative ways to control the immune response and improve organ acceptance, novel cellular treatments have ushered in a new era in transplantation therapy. The therapeutic potential of Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSCs), Regulatory T Cells (Tregs), Natural Killer (NK) cell therapies, and the use of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs) in transplantation are among the particular cellular therapies covered in this section [41-49] (Table 3).

Biotechnological innovations in transplantation

Biotechnology and transplantation have come together to provide revolutionary breakthroughs that have improved organ transplantation and post-transplant care. This section discusses some important biotechnological developments like organ transplantation, 3D printing, nanotechnology for the delivery of immunosuppressive agents, tissue engineering through bioengineering, and the use of implantable and wearable devices for monitoring patients after a transplant [50].

3D printing in organ transplantation

The field of organ transplantation, while still undergoing rigorous biotechnological advancements, faces multitudes of challenges concerning its progression. The most concerning enhancement issue is the shortage of donors [51]. Medical bioprinting is one of the most significant processes emerging in the field of medicine, as it permits life science technicians to print tissues, organs, and even parts of vital organs, including human hearts, kidneys, and bones. There are strides made towards the advancement of organ transplantation, which are increasing the relevance of 3D bioprinting in solving problems like the lack of organ donors. Issues in the medical field involving organ transposition, as well as tissue and organ mending, are being aided by the advancement of printing technology. Creating complex structures with capabilities like fully functional engraved arterial systems offers new possibilities for fully operational organs to be produced for transplant [52-55].

Nanotechnology in immunosuppression delivery

A potent approach for increasing the precision and efficacy of immunosuppressive medication delivery in transplantation is nanotechnology. Drug-carrying nanoparticles enable the accurate dispersion of immunosuppressive medicines, reducing overall side effects and enhancing therapeutic outcomes. This approach may improve the balance between transplant acceptance and immunosuppression [56]. Materials like iron, carbon, gold, silica, and silicon have been used to create a wide variety of nanoparticles and nanodevices [57]. Among the many uses for which nanoparticles have been developed are drug delivery, receptor-mediated targeting, environmentally-triggered release, thermal ablation, molecular imaging, and magnetism [58-63]. Nanomembranes and nano-fluidic systems have been developed for prolonged drug delivery, diagnostics, and fluid selective filtering [64-66].

Bioengineering solutions for tissue engineering

The advancement of tissue engineering in transplantation depends on bioengineering solutions. To create functional tissues and organs, scaffolds, biomimetic materials, and cellular structures are used. Bioengineered tissues that combine synthetic and biological components may be able to solve concerns associated with the shortage of donor organs. The most effective route to clinical implementation may be to use these technologies to manufacture organs for transplantation, as evidenced by developments in organ bioengineering and regeneration. To produce an end product that resembles an autograft and does not require the recipient to take any anti-rejection medication, researchers are now investigating the usage and control of autologous cells [67, 68].

Wearable and implantable devices in post-transplant monitoring

A wireless and continuous wearable sensor has been created for monitoring tissue circulation in postoperative reconstructive surgery patients. The sensor reproduces physician pulse assessment along with skin color and tissue temperature analysis, demonstrating high agreement with physician assessment. Near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) has been combined with a miniature implantable sensor used to monitor free tissue transfer (FTT) in head and neck surgery. According to reports, the NIRS sensor is dependable and well-liked by patients. It allows for continuous non-invasive assessment of dynamic tissue oxygenation parameters.  In order to monitor blood vessel function, implantable sensors have been developed to detect blood vessels dynamically and provide precise, continuous data. Motion-sensing devices such as accelerometers and pedometers worn on the wrist are used to objectively monitor activity level as a measure of recovery during the early postoperative phase. Further research is needed to validate the safety and economic value of these technologies [69-72].

Clinical trials and case studies

Clinical trials and case studies are crucial for advancing transplantation medicine because they offer important insights into the efficacy, safety, and usefulness of novel therapeutic modalities. This section offers case studies that demonstrate the effective use of innovative medicines, talks about difficulties and lessons acquired from clinical applications, and gives a summary of ongoing clinical trials.

Overview of ongoing clinical trials

CRISPR-based gene editing in allogeneic stem cell transplantation

The application of CRISPR-based gene editing in allogeneic stem cell transplantation is now being studied in a number of clinical trials.   The primary objectives are to improve overall transplant results, reduce GVHD, and raise donor cell modification accuracy.  Recent advancements in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing technology have made it possible to cure genetic illnesses like β-thalassemia in fundamental and clinical milestone applications.  Gene-edited HSCT offers a potential treatment for transfusion-dependent β-thalassemia (TDT) and can prevent GVHD and transplant rejection. There is marked emphasis on practical steps still needing to be accomplished for effective application of cell selection using CRISPR/Cas9 aimed at the three globin gene loci, HBB, HBG, and HBA. Some of the earliest work, NCT04245722 and NCT04773317, has a pragmatic focus on evaluating risk and ease of execution with this approach [42, 72].

Mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapies in solid organ transplantation

Mesenchymal Stem/Stromal Cells (MSCs) have been the basis for the development of numerous cellular treatment techniques.  MSCs have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties, can differentiate into other important cell types, allow for a decrease in immunosuppressive drugs, and enhance the acceptance of transplanted organs.  They came from a number of different sources.

The current scope of advances in tissue engineering, along with regenerative medicine, focuses on organogenesis and sourcing replenishable or more readily available references [73, 74]. Numerous clinical trials are investigating the application of MSC therapies in solid organ transplantation [75]. These trials explore the immunomodulatory properties of MSCs against the transplant acceptance tolerance level and rejection rate of the transplant. Preliminary data suggest the potential of MSCs to augment graft tolerance [76-79] (Figure 1).

Case studies highlighting successful implementation of novel therapies

Successful transcoronary infusion of cardiac progenitor cells in patients with single ventricle physiology” (TICAP )

A right atrial myocardial biopsy performed during a palliation procedure yielded the cultured cardiac tissue-derived cells used in the case study "Transcoronary Infusion of Cardiac Progenitor Cells in Patients With Single Ventricle Physiology" (TICAP), and "cardiospheres" were then cultured and grown. Four to five weeks after the palliation procedure, seven patients were assigned to receive an intracoronary injection of cardiosphere-derived cells (CDCs) via cardiac catheterisation, while seven patients received standard palliation therapies. The first effectiveness measures noted were the heart failure status and right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF), as assessed by the New York University Paediatric Heart Failure Index (NYUPHFI). Since none of the volunteers displayed any signs of ischaemia, arrhythmia, or the establishment of a heart tumour as a result of the stem cell injection, the procedure was judged safe. At the 36-month milestone, CDC recipients also displayed lower NYUPHFI scores, suggesting that the treatment's benefits persisted over time [80]. This cutting-edge technique demonstrates how tissue engineering can enhance organ transplant outcomes.

Successful induction of tolerance in renal transplantation with regulatory T cells (Tregs)

A case study by Todo et al. (2016) showed how regulatory T cells (Tregs) can successfully induce tolerance in kidney transplantation. The patient demonstrated continuous graft function with no cases of rejection after receiving Tregs in addition to normal immunosuppression. This instance demonstrates how Tregs can improve immunological tolerance in transplant recipients.  However, this approach only worked for transplant recipients who did not have any additional immunological disorders, such as autoimmune diseases.  The identification of the immunoregulatory mechanisms at work is made more difficult by the fact that only 3–17% of the cell product in this study was identified as Tregs [81, 82].

Challenges and lessons learned from clinical implementations

Immune-related adverse events in cellular therapies

The use of cellular therapies, including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, has shown challenges connected to adverse events related to the immune system [83]. Serious problems including neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome, necessitate careful patient monitoring and the creation of mitigation techniques  [84].

Hurdles in the translation of gene editing technologies to clinical settings

Problems with off-target effects and the possibility of undesirable genetic changes make it difficult to move gene editing technologies like CRISPR from preclinical research to clinical usage [85, 86]. One of the industry's biggest challenges is making sure these technologies are accurate and safe [87-92].

To sum up, case studies and clinical trials are crucial components in expanding the possibilities of transplantation therapy. As the area develops, knowledge gathered from clinical applications is crucial for refining therapeutic approaches and boosting patient outcomes.

Ethical and regulatory considerations

In the ever-evolving field of transplantation therapies, ethical and regulatory issues are crucial to ensuring the proper research and application of new technologies. This section explores the current regulatory frameworks and rules, the ethical implications of these discoveries, and the fine balance needed to maintain patient safety and innovation [93].

Ethical implications of novel therapeutic approaches

Patient autonomy and informed consent

Patient autonomy is an ethical principle that becomes increasingly important as transplantation therapy expands into new fields. Many times, using novel treatments involves using unproven or unusual methods, which emphasizes the significance of careful informed consent processes [94-99]. Ensuring that patients fully comprehend the potential risks, benefits, and uncertainties is essential to upholding the ethical principle of respecting individual autonomy [100, 101].

Allocation of limited resources

The introduction of new treatments may raise moral questions about how to allocate scarce resources, particularly when more expensive, complex treatments are involved. Ethical challenges arise when advanced treatments are provided to certain individuals while ensuring equitable access to transplantation for the general public. Ethical principles must serve as the foundation for transparent and fair allocation policies [102].

Regulatory frameworks and guidelines

Regulatory oversight and approval

Before new therapeutic approaches are used in clinical settings, they must pass stringent regulatory review.  When evaluating the efficacy and safety of these medicines, regulatory bodies such as the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are essential.  To obtain permission for clinical trials and upcoming medical applications, regulatory requirements must be met [103].

Adaptation of regulations to emerging technologies

The rapid advancement of biotechnology and regenerative medicine approaches necessitates ongoing regulatory structure adjustment [104-112]. Policies must have a robust evaluation mechanism and be flexible enough to accommodate new technologies. Researchers, regulatory bodies, and ethicists must work together to strike the best possible balance between fostering innovation and protecting patient welfare [113-117].

Balancing innovation with patient safety

Risk-benefit assessment

Risks and advantages must be carefully weighed to develop innovative transplantation treatments. Researchers and physicians must weigh the benefits of new medications against the hazards they pose to patients and the larger transplant community [118]. From preclinical research to clinical trials and eventual pharmaceutical usage, this evaluation impacts decision-making at various stages [119].

Post-marketing surveillance and long-term monitoring

Beyond the initial regulatory certifications, patient safety must be guaranteed. Long-term monitoring and post-marketing surveillance are crucial for detecting unanticipated side effects and determining the therapy's long-term efficacy. Strong systems for continuous monitoring allow for timely intervention and treatment procedure development based on data from real-world scenarios.

In the end, the moral and legal considerations surrounding transplant procedures emphasise the complex interrelationships between social values, patient welfare, and scientific progress. Ethically navigating the rapidly evolving area of transplantation medicine requires careful risk-benefit analyses, adherence to ethical norms, and adaptation of regulations to new technologies.

Future directions and challenges

Although there have been significant advancements in transplantation therapy, the field still faces both exciting opportunities and formidable challenges. In order to steer transplantation therapy into new frontiers, this section looks at potential developments, anticipated challenges, and the need for collaboration across numerous disciplines (Table 4).

1. Harrison JH, Merrill JP, Murray JE. Renal homotransplantation in identical twins. Surg Forum. 1956;6:432–6.
2. Merrill JP, Murray JE, Harrison JH, Guild WR. Successful homotransplantation of the human kidney between identical twins. JAMA. 1956;160(4):277–82. doi:10.1001/jama.1956.02960390027008
3. Hillebrand GF, Land W. Renal transplantation: progress and prospects. Artif Organs. 1996;20(6):403–7. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1594.1996.tb04523.x
4. Toledo-Pereyra LH, Palma-Vargas J. Searching for history in transplantation: early modern attempts at surgical kidney grafting. Transplant Proc. 1999;31(7):2945–8. doi:10.1016/s0041-1345(99)00622-3
5. Hussain B, Kasinath V, Madsen JC, Bromberg J, Tullius SG, Abdi R. Intra-organ delivery of nanotherapeutics for organ transplantation. ACS Nano. 2021;15(11):17124–36. doi:10.1021/acsnano.1c04707
6. Wang W, Teng Y, Xue J, Cai H, Pan Y, Ye X, et al. Nanotechnology in kidney and islet transplantation: an ongoing, promising field. Front Immunol. 2022;13:846032. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2022.846032
7. Medawar PB. Immunity to homologous grafted skin: the fate of skin homografts transplanted to the brain, to subcutaneous tissue, and to the anterior chamber of the eye. J Anat. 1948;29(1):58–69. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18865105
8. Shoskes DA, Halloran PF. Delayed graft function in renal transplantation: etiology, management, and long-term significance. J Urol. 1996;155(6):1831–40. doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(01)66023-3
9. JP S. The history of kidney transplantation: past, present and future (with special references to the Belgian history). In: InTech eBooks; 2011. doi:10.5772/19152
10. Kunder H, Gurusiddappa LH, Hanumanthappa BS, Kalikeri S. Antimicrobial activity and phytochemical analysis of solvent extraction of Citrus reticulata peels. World J Environ Biosci. 2022;11(2):20–5. doi:10.51847/g5wDo6EASN
11. Tsekhmister Y, Konovalova T, Bashkirova L, Savitskaya M, Tsekhmister B. Virtual reality in EU healthcare: Empowering patients and enhancing rehabilitation. J Biochem Technol. 2023;14(3):23–9. doi:10.51847/r5WJFVz1bj
12. Vnucak M, Granak K, Beliancinova M, Gala R, Babela R, Szilagyiova M, et al. The impact of different induction immunosuppression protocols on patient survival, graft survival, and acute graft rejection after kidney transplantation. Bratisl Med J. 2022;123(8):567–72. doi:10.4149/bll_2022_117
13. Kauke-Navarro M, Noel OF, Knoedler L, Knoedler S, Panayi AC, Stoegner VA, et al. Novel strategies in transplantation: Genetic engineering and vascularized composite allotransplantation. J Surg Res. 2023;291:176–86. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2023.03.042
14. Swanevelder J, Gordon P, Brink J, Gutsche JT, Dyer RA, Augoustides J. Fifty years: Reflections since the first successful heart transplant. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2018;32(1):14–8. doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2017.10.028
15. Miller CL, O JM, Allan JS, Madsen JC. Novel approaches for long-term lung transplant survival. Front Immunol. 2022;13:931251. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2022.931251
16. Zhou Q, Li T, Wang K, Zhang Q, Geng Z, Deng S, et al. Current status of xenotransplantation research and the strategies for preventing xenograft rejection. Front Immunol. 2022;13:928173. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2022.928173
17. Shirini K, Ladowski JM, Meier RPH. Xenotransplantation literature update July–December 2024. Xenotransplantation. 2025;32(1):e70027. doi:10.1111/xen.70027
18. Anbalakan K, Chew KM, Loh JK, Sim D, Lai SH, Teo Loon Yee L. Contemporary review of heart transplant immunology and immunosuppressive therapy. Proc Singapore Healthc. 2022;31. doi:10.1177/20101058221138840
19. Hoogduijn MJ, Issa F, Casiraghi F, Reinders MEJ. Cellular therapies in organ transplantation. Transpl Int. 2021;34(1):15–25. doi:10.1111/tri.13770
20. Goldraich LA, Leitão SA, Scolari FL, Marcondes-Braga FG, Bonatto MG, Munyal D, et al. A comprehensive and contemporary review on immunosuppression therapy for heart transplantation. Curr Pharm Des. 2020;26(28):3351-84.
21. Rickert CG, Markmann JF. Current state of organ transplant tolerance. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2019;24(4):404–10. doi:10.1097/MOT.0000000000000650
22. Line PD. The fundamental challenges in organ transplantation. Transplant Commun. 2017;1(4):006. doi:10.21926/obm.transplant.1704006
23. Ebrahimi A, Rahim F. Recent immunomodulatory strategies in transplantation. Immunol Invest. 2014;43(7):738–52. doi:10.3109/08820139.2014.930766
24. Welman T, Michel S, Segaren N, Shanmugarajah K. Bioengineering for organ transplantation: progress and challenges. Bioengineered. 2015;6(5):229–35. doi:10.1080/21655979.2015.1072409
25. Nadig SN, Leventhal J, Gallon L, Atkinson C. Editorial: precision therapeutics using next generation technologies in transplantation. Front Transplant. 2024;3:1371701. doi:10.3389/frtra.2024.1371701
26. Johnstone BH, Messner F, Brandacher G, Woods EJ. A large-scale bank of organ donor bone marrow and matched mesenchymal stem cells for promoting immunomodulation and transplant tolerance. Front Immunol. 2021;12:622604. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2021.622604
27. Legroux TM, Schymik HS, Gasparoni G, Mohammadi S, Walter J, Libert C, et al. Immunomodulation by glucocorticoid-induced leucine zipper in macrophages: Enhanced phagocytosis, protection from pyroptosis, and altered mitochondrial function. Front Immunol. 2024;15:1396827. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2024.1396827
28. Romano M, Fanelli G, Albany CJ, Giganti G, Lombardi G. Past, present, and future of regulatory T cell therapy in transplantation and autoimmunity. Front Immunol. 2019;10:43. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2019.00043
29. Delhove JMK, Qasim W. Genome-edited T cell therapies. Curr Stem Cell Rep. 2017;3:124–36. doi:10.1007/s40778-017-0077-5
30. Hameed AM, Hawthorne WJ, Pleass HC. Advances in organ preservation for transplantation. ANZ J Surg. 2017;87(12):976–80. doi:10.1111/ans.13713
31. Berkane Y, Hayau J, Filz von Reiterdank I, Kharga A, Charlès L, Mink van der Molen AB, et al. Supercooling: a promising technique for prolonged preservation in solid organ transplantation, and early perspectives in vascularized composite allografts. Front Transplant. 2023;2:1269706. doi:10.3389/frtra.2023.1269706
32. Fung RK, Kerridge IH. Gene editing advances re-ignite debate on the merits and risks of animal-to-human transplantation. Intern Med J. 2016;46(9):1017–22. doi:10.1111/imj.13183
33. Fischer K, Schnieke A. How genome editing changed the world of large animal research. Front Genome Ed. 2023;5:1272687. doi:10.3389/fgeed.2023.1272687
34. Garg T, Goyal AK. Biomaterial-based scaffolds – current status and future directions. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2014;11(5):767–89. doi:10.1517/17425247.2014.891014
35. Oberbauer R, Meyer TW. Precision medicine in transplantation and hemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2021;36(Suppl 2):31–6. Erratum in: Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2022;37(1):199. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfaa367
36. Sirota M, Sarwal MM. Transplantomics: toward precision medicine in transplantation research. Transplantation. 2017;101(8):1777–82. doi:10.1097/TP.0000000000001664
37. Girolami I, Pantanowitz L, Marletta S, Hermsen M, van der Laak J, Munari E, et al. Artificial intelligence applications for pre-implantation kidney biopsy pathology practice: a systematic review. J Nephrol. 2022;35(7):1801–8. doi:10.1007/s40620-022-01327-8
38. Naruka V, Rad AA, Ponniah HS, Francis J, Vardanyan R, Tasoudis P, et al. Machine learning and artificial intelligence in cardiac transplantation: a systematic review. Artif Organs. 2022;46(9):1741–53. doi:10.1111/aor.14334
39. Mizera J, Pondel M, Kepinska M, Jerzak P, Banasik M. Advancements in artificial intelligence for kidney transplantology: a comprehensive review of current applications and predictive models. J Clin Med. 2025;14(3):975. doi:10.3390/jcm14030975
40. Salybekov AA, Yerkos A, Sedlmayr M, Wolfien M. Ethics and algorithms to navigate AI’s emerging role in organ transplantation. J Clin Med. 2025;14(8):2775. doi:10.3390/jcm14082775
41. Alagesan S, Griffin MD. Autologous and allogeneic mesenchymal stem cells in organ transplantation: what do we know about their safety and efficacy? Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2014;19(1):65–72. doi:10.1097/MOT.0000000000000043
42. Deo D, Marchioni M, Rao P. Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells in organ transplantation. Pharmaceutics. 2022;14(4):791. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics14040791
43. Proics E, David M, Mojibian M, Speck M, Lounnas-Mourey N, Govehovitch A, et al. Preclinical assessment of antigen-specific chimeric antigen receptor regulatory T cells for use in solid organ transplantation. Gene Ther. 2023;30(3–4):309–22. doi:10.1038/s41434-022-00358-x
44. Hippen KL, Merkel SC, Schirm DK, Sieben CM, Sumstad D, Kadidlo DM, et al. Massive ex vivo expansion of human natural regulatory T cells (T(regs)) with minimal loss of in vivo functional activity. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3(83):83ra41. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3001809
45. Bachanova V, Maakaron JE, Cichocki F, McKenna DH, Cao Q, DeFor TE, et al. Gda-201, a novel metabolically enhanced allogeneic natural killer (NK) cell product yields high remission rates in patients with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL): 2-year survival and correlation with cytokine IL7. Blood. 2021;138:3854.
46. Ma M, Badeti S, Kim JK, Liu D. Natural Killer (NK) and CAR-NK cell expansion method using membrane bound-IL-21-modified B cell line. J Vis Exp. 2022;(180):e62336. doi:10.3791/62336
47. Hsia GSP, Esposito J, da Rocha LA, Ramos SLG, Okamoto OK. Clinical application of human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived organoids as an alternative to organ transplantation. Stem Cells Int. 2021;2021:6632160. doi:10.1155/2021/6632160
48. Goulart E. Stem cell technology in organ transplantation: A novel method for 3D bioprinting functional and stable liver grafts using human iPS cells-derived cells. Methods Mol Biol. 2023;2575:269-74. doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-2716-7_13
49. Piao J, Zabierowski S, Dubose BN, Hill EJ, Navare M, Claros N, et al. Preclinical efficacy and safety of a human embryonic stem cell-derived midbrain dopamine progenitor product, MSK-DA01. Cell Stem Cell. 2021;28(2):217-29.
50. Martin R, Joung D. The promise and challenges of bioprinting in tissue engineering. Micromachines. 2024;15(12):1529. doi:10.3390/mi15121529
51. Moroni L, Boland T, Burdick JA, De Maria C, Derby B, Forgacs G, et al. Biofabrication: a guide to technology and terminology. Trends Biotechnol. 2018;36(4):384-402. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.10.015
52. Huang G, Zhao Y, Chen D, Wei L, Hu Z, Li J, et al. Applications, advancements, and challenges of 3D bioprinting in organ transplantation. Biomater Sci. 2024;12:1425–48. doi:10.1039/D3BM01934A
53. Lim G, Choi D, Richardson EB. 3-D printing in organ transplantation. Hanyang Med Rev. 2014;34(4):158–64.
54. Ozbolat IT, Yu Y. Bioprinting toward organ fabrication: challenges and future trends. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2013;60(3):691–9. doi:10.1109/TBME.2013.2243912
55. Tripathi AS, Malakar K, Singh AK, Chaudhary I. 3D organ printing: a prospect of medical sciences in organ transplantation. Innovare J Life Sci. 2013;1:10-7.
56. Tasciotti E, Cabrera FJ, Evangelopoulos M, Martinez JO, Thekkedath UR, Kloc M, et al. The emerging role of nanotechnology in cell and organ transplantation. Transplantation. 2016;100(8):1629–38. doi:10.1097/TP.0000000000001100
57. Sanvicens N, Marco MP. Multifunctional nanoparticles—properties and prospects for their use in human medicine. Trends Biotechnol. 2008;26(8):425–33. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2008.04.005
58. Martinez JO, Evangelopoulos M, Bhavane R, Acciardo S, Salvatore F, Liu X, et al. Multistage nanovectors enhance the delivery of free and encapsulated drugs. Curr Drug Targets. 2015;16(14):1582–90. doi:10.2174/1389450115666141015113914
59. Thierry B, Al-Ejeh F, Brown MP, Majewski P, Griesser HJ. Immunotargeting of functional nanoparticles for MRI detection of apoptotic tumor cells. Adv Mater. 2009;21(5):541–5. doi:10.1002/adma.200800396
60. Muhammad F, Guo M, Qi W, Sun F, Wang A, Guo Y, et al. pH-Triggered controlled drug release from mesoporous silica nanoparticles via intracelluar dissolution of ZnO nanolids. J Am Chem Soc. 2011;133(23):8778–81. doi:10.1021/ja200328s
61. Letfullin RR, Iversen CB, George TF. Modeling nanophotothermal therapy: kinetics of thermal ablation of healthy and cancerous cell organelles and gold nanoparticles. Nanomedicine. 2011;7(2):137–45. doi:10.1016/j.nano.2010.09.004
62. Hedlund A, Ahrén M, Gustafsson H, Abrikossova N, Warntjes M, Jönsson JI, et al. Gd₂O₃ nanoparticles in hematopoietic cells for MRI contrast enhancement. Int J Nanomedicine. 2011;6:3233–40. doi:10.2147/IJN.S23940
63. Yigit MV, Moore A, Medarova Z. Magnetic nanoparticles for cancer diagnosis and therapy. Pharm Res. 2012;29(5):1180–8. doi:10.1007/s11095-012-0715-4
64. Han J, Fu J, Schoch RB. Molecular sieving using nanofilters: past, present, and future. Lab Chip. 2008;8(1):23–33. doi:10.1039/B711499C
65. Hu Y, Fine DH, Tasciotti E, Bouamrani A, Ferrari M. Nanodevices in diagnostics. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 2011;3(1):11–32. doi:10.1002/wnan.82
66. Fine D, Grattoni A, Hosali S, Ziemys A, De Rosa E, Gill J, et al. A robust nanofluidic membrane with tunable zero-order release for implantable dose-specific drug delivery. Lab Chip. 2010;10(22):3074–83. doi:10.1039/C0LC00103A
67. Orlando G, Soker S, Stratta RJ. Organ bioengineering and regeneration as the new Holy Grail for organ transplantation. Ann Surg. 2013;258(2):221–32. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31829c79cf
68. Katari RS, McNamara KP, Gentile C, Edgar L, Callese TE, Igel DA, et al. Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine solutions for the abdominal organs. [Unpublished manuscript or institutional publication if applicable].
69. Skowno JJ, Karpelowsky JS. Near-infrared spectroscopy for monitoring renal transplant perfusion. Pediatr Nephrol. 2014;29(11):2241–2. doi:10.1007/s00467-014-2912-6
70. Malakasioti G, Marks SD, Watson T, Williams F, Taylor-Allkins M, Mamode N, et al. Continuous monitoring of kidney transplant perfusion with near-infrared spectroscopy. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2018;33(10):1863–9. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfy116
71. Zeng S, Lei S, Qu C, Wang Y, Teng S, Huang P. CRISPR/Cas-based gene editing in therapeutic strategies for beta-thalassemia. Hum Genet. 2023;142(12):1677–703. doi:10.1007/s00439-023-02610-9
72. Lanza R, Russell DW, Nagy A. Engineering universal cells that evade immune detection. Nat Rev Immunol. 2019;19(12):723–33. doi:10.1038/s41577-019-0214-2
73. Podestà MA, Remuzzi G, Casiraghi F. Mesenchymal stromal cell therapy in solid organ transplantation. Front Immunol. 2021;11:618243. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2020.618243
74. Cheung CY, Tang SCW. Personalized immunosuppression after kidney transplantation. Nephrology (Carlton). 2022;27(6):475–83. doi:10.1111/nep.14035
75. Al Moussawy M, Lakkis ZS, Ansari ZA, Cherukuri AR, Abou-Daya KI. The transformative potential of artificial intelligence in solid organ transplantation. Front Transplant. 2024;3:1361491. doi:10.3389/frtra.2023.1361491
76. ClinicalTrials.gov. Database of ongoing trials in transplantation. 2024. Available from: https://clinicaltrials.gov
77. Rosenberg AS, Tourdot S, Markusic D. Editorial: Induction of immune tolerance: addressing unmet medical need in immune mediated diseases and immune responses to biologics. Front Immunol. 2023;14:1219854. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2023.1219854
78. Trolinger M. Kidney transplant for the twenty-first century. Physician Assist Clin. 2016;1(1):205–20.
79. Mohsin A, Javaid S, Mehwish M, Imran R. A review of the potential use of mesenchymal stem cell therapy for the management of COVID-19 infection. Biosci Res. 2023;19:2250–5.
80. Abraham R, Vricella L, Hibino N. Cardiac tissue engineering for the treatment of hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS). Transl Pediatr. 2023;12(8):1592–600. doi:10.21037/tp-23-127
81. Todo S, Yamashita K, Goto R, Zaitsu M, Nagatsu A, Oura T, et al. A pilot study of operational tolerance with a regulatory T-cell-based cell therapy in living donor liver transplantation. Hepatology. 2016;64:632–43. doi:10.1002/hep.28459
82. Trzonkowski P, Bieniaszewska M, Juścińska J, Dobyszuk A, Krzystyniak A, Marek N, et al. First-in-man clinical results of the treatment of patients with graft versus host disease with human ex vivo expanded CD4⁺CD25⁺CD127⁻ T regulatory cells. Clin Immunol. 2009;133:22–6. doi:10.1016/j.clim.2009.06.001
83. Adkins S. CAR T-Cell therapy: adverse events and management. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2019;10(Suppl 3):21–8. doi:10.6004/jadpro.2019.10.4.11
84. Al Bshabshe AA, Wani JI, Rangreze I, Asiry MA, Mansour H, Ahmed AG, et al. Orientation of university students about brain death and organ donation: a cross-sectional study. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2016;27(5):966–70. doi:10.4103/1319-2442.190865
85. Doudna JA, Charpentier E. The new frontier of genome engineering with CRISPR-Cas9. Science. 2020;367(6482):126–31. doi:10.1126/science.aax1146
86. Frangoul H, Altshuler D, Cappellini MD, Chen Y, Domm J, Eustace BK, et al. CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing for sickle cell disease and β-thalassemia. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(3):252–60. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2031054
87. Dobrzynski W, Szymonowicz M, Wiglusz RJ, Rybak Z, Zawadzka-Knefel A, Janecki M, et al. Nanotechnology in orthodontics: current applications and future perspectives. Asian J Periodontics Orthod. 2024;4:24–33. doi:10.51847/pRV7a8ayHa
88. Alsubeie MS. Comprehensive analysis of castor bean (ricinus communis): morphology, genetics, and chemical composition in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Int J Vet Res Allied Sci. 2023;3(1):19–25. doi:10.51847/jgqI2t2Fg9
89. Zafeiraki E, Sabo R, Kasiotis KM, Machera K, Sabová L, Majchrák T. Identification of various elements and heavy metals in honeybee and beeswax samples from different environmental sources. Int J Vet Res Allied Sci. 2024;4(2):27–39. doi:10.51847/TqjCGYfua4
90. Malinga L, Laing M. Economic evaluation of biopesticides vs. chemical insecticides: impact on cotton farming in South Africa. Entomol Lett. 2024;4(2):22-33. doi:10.51847/0dYZdyeQRm
91. Anushree A, Ali MZ, Ahsan J. Cognitive impairments induced by acute arsenic exposure in drosophila melanogaster larvae. Entomol Lett. 2023;3(2):1–8. doi:10.51847/T2OLB4wjap
92. Duraimurugan V, Paramanandham J, Jayakumar S, Krishnappa K, Nivetha N. Ecological characteristics of tree-holes and insect larval diversity in tree-hole water in mayiladuthurai taluk. Entomol Lett. 2022;2(1):37–42. doi:10.51847/7aUDVhAJ9D
93. Hansen SL, Schicktanz S, editors. Ethical challenges of organ transplantation: current debates and international perspectives. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag; 2021. (Bioethik / Medizinethik, 3). doi:10.14361/9783839446430
94. Mubayrik AFB, Al-Turck K, Aldaijy RE, Alshehri RM, Bedaiwi AA, Alofisan AO, et al. Understanding the dangers of sun exposure and the importance of photoprotection practices in public awareness. Turk J Public Health Dent. 2022;2(1):1–8. doi:10.51847/32g0nPWudc
95. Daivasigamani S, Chidambaranathan AS, Balasubramanium M. A systematic review on the color stability of maxillofacial silicone materials after disinfection and aging procedures. Int J Dent Res Allied Sci. 2022;2(1):8–12. doi:10.51847/8qZssQqjrK
96. Mohandas R, Ramani P, Mohapatra S. Exploring corono-condylar distance as a radiographic marker for chronological age. Int J Dent Res Allied Sci. 2022;2(2):7–9. doi:10.51847/xF069fnRvk
97. Broers DLM, Dubois L, Lange JD, Welie JVM, Brands WG, Lagas MBD, et al. Surgical tooth extraction competence among dental postgraduates and general practitioners. Ann J Dent Med Assist. 2023;3(1):11–9. doi:10.51847/ppTsYrGv1a
98. Hackenberg B, Schlich M, Gouveris H, Seifen C, Matthias C, Campus G, et al. Perceived competence of dental students in managing medical emergencies: a cross-sectional study. Ann J Dent Med Assist. 2023;3(1):20–5. doi:10.51847/SlNUqaRTG2
99. Makakova DR, Zagorchev P, Dimitrova M, Georgieva Y, Tilov B. Diode laser vs. retraction cord: evaluating gingival retraction efficacy in prosthodontics. Asian J Periodontics Orthod. 2024;4:52–9. doi:10.51847/PzJumKgace
100. Okamoto S, Perales M, Sureda A, Niederwiese D. The activities and regulatory landscape of cellular therapies including hematopoietic cell transplantation in the world. Blood Cell Ther. 2022;5(S3):S15–24. doi:10.31547/bct-2022-013
101. Tayade SD, Mehdi N, Dube R, Bose V, Ameer A, Hakim ZT, et al. A rare variant of mullerian agenesis: a case report and review of the literature. J Med Case Rep. 2024;18:126. doi:10.1186/s13256-024-04438-x
102. Nassar A, Srivastava A, Hashmi SK, Aljurf M. Establishing an HSCT program with limited resources. In: Establishing a Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Unit: A Practical Guide. 2018. p. 257–70.
103. Batra RK, Mulligan DC. Current status: meeting the regulatory goals of your liver transplant program. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2021;26(2):146–51. doi:10.1097/MOT.0000000000000869
104. Liu M, Tang Q, Wang Q, Xie W, Fan J, Tang S, et al. Studying the sleep quality of first pregnant women in the third trimester of pregnancy and some factors related to it. J Integr Nurs Palliat Care. 2022;3:1–6. doi:10.51847/K1PUWsJ24H
105. Zhang X, Wu X, Cao J, Guo N, Bo H, Ma Y, et al. Investigating Factors Affecting the Length of Patients' Stay in Hospitals. J Integr Nurs Palliat Care. 2022;3:26–30. doi:10.51847/FLasQgumnS
106. İlaslan E, Adıbelli D, Teskereci G, Cura ŞÜ. Studying the Impact of clinical decision-making and critical thinking on the quality of nursing care. J Integr Nurs Palliat Care. 2023;4:23–9. doi:10.51847/fsTLiDadY3
107. Enwa FO, Jewo AO, Oyubu LO, Adjekuko CO, Effiong V. Incidence of vaginal infections among females of different age categories in Delta State, Nigeria. Bull Pioneer Res Med Clin Sci. 2022;1(1):18–23. doi:10.51847/C1oahQ115n
108. Makhoahle PM, Makhalima NL, Motsumi C. Comparison of performance and precision of advia 2120i and XT 2000i analyzers. Bull Pioneer Res Med Clin Sci. 2023;2(1):1–8. doi:10.51847/VVMvjcrGcK
109. Tabassum M, Ayub F, Tanveer K, Ramzan M, Bukhsh A, Mohammed ZM, et al. Quality-of-life assessment in musculoskeletal disorder patients, Lahore, Pakistan. Bull Pioneer Res Med Clin Sci. 2023;2(1):17–24. doi:10.51847/QVOwcxjCwX
110. Kulkarni S, Zope S, Suragimath G, Varma S, Kale A. The influence of female sex hormones on periodontal health: a regional awareness study. Ann Orthod Periodontics Spec. 2023;3:10–8. doi:10.51847/v4EFMh6WEf
111. Ismikhanov AG, Dadaeva GT, Dzhabrailov SM, Maysigova JB, Semenov MR, Dzagurova LA. The role of selenium-containing compounds in periodontal and dental disease management. Ann Orthod Periodontics Spec. 2024;4:32–8. doi:10.51847/pB7YqtH50J
112. Al-Khotani A, Naimi-Akbar A, Albadawi E, Ernberg M, Hedenberg-Magnusson B, Christidis N. Prevalence of cross-bite in school-aged children in Jeddah: an observational study. Turk J Public Health Dent. 2022;2(1):9–12. doi:10.51847/cG9FlihXIO
113. Nikolenko MV, Trigub VV, Popov VG, Ragozinnikova EV, Cherentsova GG, Tokhiriyon B. Plant biotechnology potential for food production: the tyumen region. J Biochem Technol. 2023;14(3):1–5. doi:10.51847/HsRSeyPlWa
114. Ashwinirani S, Suragimath G, Nimbal AV. Deviated nasal septum prevalence and associated symptoms in Maharashtra population of India. Int J Pharm Res Allied Sci. 2023;12(3):1–6. doi:10.51847/pEIcUqHJXg
115. Sulaiman AA, Alsuwailem FS, Alturki YDA, Melibari BW. Awareness of HPV screening and vaccination in King Saud Medical City, KSA. Int J Pharm Res Allied Sci. 2023;12(3):18–27. doi:10.51847/oXyzzTGjMX
116. Natarajan GP, Venkataraman SM, Pitchamuthu S, Rengaraj M. Impact of silicon seed priming on osmoregulators, antioxidants, and seedling growth of maize grown under chemo-stress. World J Environ Biosci. 2022;11(2):1–7. doi:10.51847/ODzSUPDgnz
117. Dube R, Kar SS, Jhancy M, George BT. Molecular basis of müllerian agenesis causing congenital uterine factor infertility—a systematic review. Int J Mol Sci. 2024;25(1):120. doi:10.3390/ijms25010120
118. Chowdhury F, Dube R, Riyaz R, Khan K, Al-Zuheiri STS, Rangraze IR. Efficacy of metformin as monotherapy in gestational and pre-gestational diabetic pregnant women. J Adv Pharm Educ Res. 2024;14(2):84–90. doi:10.51847/QoUS4cqLD6
119. Omar MO, Ali MJ, Qabillie SE, Haji AI, Takriti MB, Atif AH, et al. Beyond vision: potential role of AI-enabled ocular scans in the prediction of aging and systemic disorders. Siriraj Med J. 2024;76(2):106–15. doi:10.33192/smj.v76i2.266303
120. Olawade DB, Marinze S, Qureshi N, Weerasinghe K, Teke J. The impact of artificial intelligence and machine learning in organ retrieval and transplantation: a comprehensive review. Curr Res Transl Med. 2025;73(2):103493. doi:10.1016/j.retram.2025.103493
121. World Health Organization Global Observatory on Donation and Transplantation. Annual report. 2023. Available from: https://www.transplant-observatory.org
122. Ahuja HK, Mohan S, Williams WW. Health policy challenges and opportunities for equitable access for transplantation. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2025;30(2):103–6. doi:10.1097/MOT.0000000000001196