Woman gives birth using womb transplanted from dead donor

[DonViejo]

Source: The Guardian



Patient in Brazil who had been born without uterus gives birth to baby girl

Nicola Davis

A woman in Brazil has successfully given birth after receiving a womb from a dead donor, the first time such a procedure has been successful.

While researchers in countries including Sweden and the US have previously succeeded in transplanting wombs from living donors into women who have gone on to give birth, experts said the latest development was a significant advance.

“With a deceased donor, you reduce the risk because you don’t have the risk to the donor – and you reduce the costs, too, because you don’t have the hospitalisation and the very long surgery of the donor,” said Dr Dani Ejzenberg of the University of São Paulo, who led the research.

Ejzenberg said that finding a living donor could also be difficult, while coordinating operations was logistically challenging.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/04/woman-gives-birth-using-womb-transplanted-from-dead-donor

[PJMcK]

1. THIS IS AMAZING!!!

I was just about to post this, too!

Science, baby, science.

Major tip o' the hat to these incredibles scientists, aka, doctors.

In the world of Trump, this is a wonderful story!

[montana_hazeleyes]

2. I'm coming along here

with an off the wall question. But it was the first thing I thought of. If a woman has a donor uterus, can she feel contractions?

[Lars39]

3. If the uterus hadn't been rejected by the recipient

it seems like it would work as intended.

[montana_hazeleyes]

4. Thanks Lars39.

I'm going to have to read up on this subject. It's blowing my mind!

[Lars39]

5. I'm just guessing!

I just figured if hormones and nerves are involved...

[montana_hazeleyes]

6. Makes sense.

I'd somehow never knew about this. It will be interesting learning more.

[Lars39]

7. I hope they release more info on it.

Fascinating progress!

[Demonaut]

8. thank god the donor was dead

you're only born with one uterus

[Hortensis]

9. ? Thank the law and human decency, especially the donor's.

What a wonderful gift to have passed on.

[Ms. Toad]

10. No. Just no.

Anti-rejection meds for the rest of the life of the recipient -in excess of $100,000/year.

That's one expensive baby - not to mention the not insignificant side effects attached to those drugs.

Adopt. Use a surrogate. Just because science can do something, doesn't mean it should.

[LakeSuperiorView]

11. Antirejection drugs for as long as she has the donor uterus...

Not necessarily for the rest of her life.

I agree, an expensive baby. And there are many options. But with the wealth inequality that we have now, the rich have to find things new on which to spend money.

[LisaL]

17. They took the uterus out. She won't need any anti-rejection drugs.

[Ms. Toad]

21. Likely true - but since most transplants are intended to last for life,

I am not sure of the implications of removing a transplant in terms of ending the need for anti-rejection meds. You don't remove a liver - so whether a need for anti-rejecton drugs after it is removed isn't something I have experience with. But I wouldn't rule it out.

[LakeSuperiorView]

23. The purpose of anirejection drugs is to keep one's body from attacking the transplanted organ.

If you need the organ to keep working, it must be protected from the immune system of the new host. For an organ that has been removed, there is not a concern if the host's immune system attacks foreign material.

If they removed the donor uterus, she needs no anti-rejection drugs. She may not have needed much if any during the pregnancy, a fetus is half foreign and the body of a pregnant woman compensates.

I am not a doctor, so I can't rule it out. But my knowledge says that it highly unlikely she has further need, certainly not for life.

[Bayard]

12. Agreed

All this just to experience the "miracle" of birth. There are millions of kids out there looking for good parents.

[blugbox]

13. Of course it's not for everyone

But how does science ever advance?

The only way we've advanced to where we are is by doing experimental procedures. Those are always expensive. After time though, like everything else, if it becomes more common it'll get cheaper and more advanced.

The cost of those meds could come waaaay down, or we find a way around rejection. We don't get there without this current step though.

[Ms. Toad]

14. Are you serious?

The cost of those meds could come waaaay down, or we find a way around rejection. We don't get there without this current step though.

This is not an issue tied specifically to the uterus - it has to do wtih the body trying to destroy foreign invaders, of whatever sort - liver, heart, kidney, etc. So any way around anti-rejection drugs will have absolutely nothing to do with "this current step." We have been doing transplants for more than 6 decades. With few exceptions, all transplants require anti-rejecion drugs, and in 6 decades prices have not gone "waaay down," if anything they have gotten more expensive as more effective anti-rejection drugs enter the market.

[LisaL]

16. That's not accurate.

They removed the uterus after the birth of the child. She will not need anti-rejection drugs for the rest of her life.

[Ms. Toad]

22. That may be accurate -

I don't know. My experience is with permanent transplants. Cells do not always stay put (metastasis, for example, involves cells moving from one location in the body to another - so i would not rule out the need for ongoing anti-rejection drugs without more infomation.

[LisaL]

27. She will not need any anti-rejection drugs because transplanted uterus is removed.

That has been reported in the actual article about this case. So there are no issues with needing anti-rejections drugs after the delivery.

[pnwmom]

15. I wish the article had addressed the question of possible effects

of immune-suppressive drugs on the developing fetus.

[LisaL]

18. You can find that information.

"Therefore, the majority of pregnancies in transplantation recipients are safe and uncomplicated."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5108169/

[pnwmom]

19. That's good to know. n/t

[Ms. Toad]

24. People with transplants of other organs give birth -

they are on the same meds, so it wouldn't be any different.

[pnwmom]

25. Right. The article above lists several drugs, and some of them

appear to be okay for the fetus, and others shouldn't be given.

[Raine]

28. I totally agree

I'm opposed to this..

[LisaL]

29. So you oppose to her body, her choice?

[0rganism]

20. maybe someday soon "pro-life" men can be implanted with uteruses (uteri?)

so they can finally practice what they preach...

[woodsprite]

26. My grandmother always said that if men had babies

Abortions and reliable birth control would be sacraments.

[LisaL]

30. With this technique, it might be possible for a man to gestate a baby.

I guess he will also need hormone injections.