In September 2018, NYU Langone transplant surgeon Robert A. Montgomery became a heart transplant recipient himself. Living with familial dilated cardiomyopathy, he had reached the point at which his own future depended on a donated organ. NYU Langone's open account, published in its Spring 2019 magazine, describes that change from doctor to patient. [1]
He received a human donor heart, not a pig heart. The donor was hepatitis C positive, and NYU reports that subsequent antiviral treatment cleared the infection. His later kidney xenotransplantation research is a different part of the story. [1]
From an individual story to a research question
Montgomery and colleagues subsequently reported pig-to-human kidney transplantation studies in NEJM and Nature. The first followed two decedent recipients for 54 hours; the later study followed one for 61 days. These are different research models and observation windows, not a simple claim that transplantation has been solved. Read the study-by-study evidence brief →
The later report describes rejection during the observation period and its reversal after treatment. Our evidence brief keeps that limitation visible, alongside the Nature paper's two 2026 correction notices. It also distinguishes research in recipients with established brain death from clinical outcomes in living patients.
Montgomery's personal heart transplant was a human-to-human transplant in 2018. His team's pig-kidney studies investigate a different organ source. Neither study evaluated BHOC.
The BHOC Transplant perspective
We see a useful distinction: finding additional sources of organs and preserving an organ's function are connected goals, but they are not the same task. Our proposed contribution belongs to the second question.
We believe that oxygen delivery should be studied across the whole transplant journey, with separate questions before procurement, during organ preservation and preparation, and after implantation. That is the purpose of our Before · During · After approach, not a claim that these external studies demonstrate a BHOC benefit.
The practical question is specific: could a characterized oxygen carrier help sustain measured graft function under defined conditions? Oxygen affinity, temperature response, tissue metabolism and organ-specific outcomes would need to be evaluated together. Our Science page explains the proposed measurements. Gene editing, rejection management and oxygen support must remain distinct research interventions.
Montgomery's experience offers a human reason to take these questions seriously. Scientific progress still has to be judged through the evidence for each organ, intervention and patient setting.
Sources and further reading
- NYU Langone's original open account of Montgomery's heart transplant, Spring 2019. NYU Langone Transplant Institute.
- BHOC Transplant evidence brief: original NEJM and Nature references, publication dates, limitations and correction links.
- The New York Times feature that prompted this editorial note. Subscription access may be required.
Editorial note: this is an independent BHOC perspective, not a translation or reproduction of the NYT article. The full NYT text was not reviewed for this note; biographical facts are supported by NYU's open account, and research findings by the linked original records. The BHOC publication date is not the date of Montgomery's operation. Naming researchers or institutions does not imply their endorsement of or partnership with BHOC.