Brain-Dead Man Receives Three Organs From Genetically Modified Pig

A study published in May 2026 reveals the first experiment in which a clinically dead man received two kidneys and a liver transplanted from a genetically modified pig. This is the first time multiple organs from a GM pig have been transplanted into a single person. Surgeons at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University in China transplanted the organs into a man who was clinically brain-dead with consent from his family.

This type of transplant from non-humans to humans is called xenotransplantation. Industry leaders are optimistic about the future ability of xenotransplantation to save lives that otherwise would perish while waiting on the organ transplant list. There are real concerns of xenozoonosis that could involve the spreading of animal viruses from the individual to other humans in ways that would not otherwise be possible. There are also a number of practical and ethical concerns with the field of xenotransplantation.

The pig in the recent study was genetically modified with six targeted changes. Three pig genes were permanently disabled to remove molecules that trigger violent human immune attacks. Three human genes were inserted to make the organs more compatible with human biology. The editing was done with tools like CRISPR with a goal of preventing the body from rejecting the foreign tissue.

The organs functioned for nearly five days without any signs of hyperacute rejection, which is the rapid, catastrophic immune response that usually occurs in the first 24 hours. Researcher Jixiang Liao and the team described it as providing “initial evidence for the feasibility of pig-to-human orthotopic whole liver plus bilateral kidney transplantation.” Orthotopic means the organs were placed in the normal anatomical positions.

The United States has had pig kidneys and hearts from 10-gene-edited pigs keep living patients alive for weeks to months under compassionate-use rules before complications arose. China’s multi-organ attempt pushes the bounds of the technology further.

In the US, over 100,000 people sit on transplant waiting lists with dozens of them dying every day. Pig organs could theoretically provide an unlimited supply because they breed quickly, grow to suitable size, and can be raised in controlled facilities.

Recent transplants have successfully moved beyond the stage where the body has typically rejected the pig organs, so the potential use of xenotransplantation in the future no longer seems impossible.

“They could be superior at some point because we can constantly modify them to make them better, where you can’t do that with a human organ,” said NYU transplant surgeon Dr. Robert Montgomery.

Supporters of the technology say this could end long dialysis waits for kidney patients, provide livers for those with failure, and save countless lives. Formal trials from companies like United Therapeutics use pig organs as a bridge or permanent solution amidst an organ shortage. They also point to the ethical victory of needing fewer human donors and a potential reduction in exploitation that occurs in illegal organ markets.

 The only success stories so far have still required the organs to be removed after weeks or months when infections or other complications eventually occurred. Delayed rejection through antibodies and blood-clotting problems can damage the new organs over time.

The biggest fear involves porcine endogenous retroviruses (PERVs), which are DNA sequences naturally embedded in the pig genome. Even with gene editing, these viral sequences could become active once the pig organ is inside a human, potentially producing infectious virus particles that the recipient’s body then carries. Scientists can inactivate many PERVs in the donor pigs through editing, but unknown pathogens or new mutations remain possible. A novel virus spreading from a transplant patient could pose public health risks far beyond the individual.

Dr. Jay Fishman, an infectious disease expert involved in transplant ethics, wrote in his 2024 paper that “The risk for transmission of infection due to novel pathogens in association with xenotransplantation is unknown.” Fishman concluded, “Infection control measures include storage of baseline blood samples from the xenograft donor, persons involved in procurement and transplantation of pig organs, and serial monitoring of the recipient and close contacts for known and possible unknown pathogens.”

Serial monitoring of the patient and any close contacts could be considered a violation of privacy or freedom, but it could be the only way to ensure a virus doesn’t mutate and become infectious to humans.

There are also the ethical issues of genetically modifying animals and using them as organ factories. Animal welfare advocates and some religions view this as an unsolvable ethical hurdle that should prevent any widespread usage of this technology.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has promised to move the federal government away from animal testing as it is not a reliable indicator for human health outcomes as well as ethical concerns. The White Coat Waste Project has repeatedly pushed back on the administration for claiming its intent to halt animal testing while still greenlighting certain projects.

Stat News published an op-ed last month from Joshua Mezrick, a professor of surgery at the University of Wisconsin. Mezrick argues that xenotransplantation is part of a health care revolution that is happening right now and the promises of the Trump administration to halt animal testing can prevent progress.

“It is one thing if we decide as a society that we no longer want to fund animal research due to ethical objections, but we need to be realistic about what we will lose from a research standpoint,” Mezrick wrote. “Innovations like xenotransplantation would never have reached clinical trials without animal experimentation.”

The first successful porcine heart valve transplant occurred in 1965 and it became commercially available by 1970. Experiments with whole pig organs have been attempted for decades, but most failed quickly due to immune rejection. CRISPR and similar gene-editing technology has allowed the field to move much closer to clinical reality in the last 10–15 years, with meaningful success in living patients only occurring in the last five years.