Developing: Surgeon Says He Did the World's First Spinal Cord Transplant

A surgeon says he has carried out the world's first transplant of spinal-cord tissue, in Moscow, but no one has yet reported that the patient has regained any movement or feeling ^[1][2].

The account comes from Xiaoping Ren, of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, who told New Scientist that he led the operation at the Sklifosovsky Institute in Moscow ^[1]. This is a developing story. The operation is publicly confirmed. The method, the novelty and any benefit rest largely on Ren's word.

What is established

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin announced on October 16, 2026, that a spinal-cord transplant had been performed at the Sklifosovsky Institute, which he described as the first in Russia ^[2]. He said it lasted 12 hours and that the patient was in good condition ^[2]. He added that Chinese colleagues took part as part of medical collaboration and technology transfer ^[2]. A Moscow medical news outlet, Medvestnik, repeated the mayor's account and also reported that Chinese specialists were involved ^[3].

That is the confirmed core: a long operation, a named hospital, a patient the city says is doing well. The patient has not been named, and nothing here goes beyond what the surgeon and the city have said publicly.

What Ren says

Everything more specific comes from Ren. He told New Scientist that the operation was done on an adult whose spinal-cord injury was complete and three years old ^[1]. A complete injury means the cord is cut off so thoroughly that signals between the brain and the body below the damage cannot get through, which leaves paralysis and loss of sensation. Where on the spine the injury lies has not been reported ^[1].

According to Ren, the surgeons cut out the damaged section of the recipient's cord and replaced it with a section from a brain-dead donor ^[1]. They then used polyethylene glycol, known as PEG, and microsurgical techniques to join the donor tissue to the recipient's cord ^[1]. New Scientist describes PEG as a kind of biological glue ^[1].

The idea behind it comes from Ren's work with Sergio Canavero, which has included proposals to fuse cut spinal-cord surfaces with PEG ^[1]. The theory is that once nerve fibres are joined, the nervous system could adapt to the new connections and carry signals again ^[1].

Ren said his Russian team would later release a document describing the surgery ^[1].

Where the evidence stops

Neither Ren nor the mayor has reported that the patient has regained movement, sensation or any other function ^[1][2]. No peer-reviewed report or outcome data has been published ^[1]. Good condition after a 12-hour operation is a statement about surviving surgery, not about the spinal cord working.

There is animal work behind the approach. New Scientist reported recovery of movement in mice, dogs and pigs using related techniques ^[1]. But it also noted that joining a freshly severed cord is a different task from repairing an injury three years old, and different again from fitting in a donated segment of cord ^[1]. This operation involves all of those harder conditions at once.

Two researchers who spoke to New Scientist were wary, for different reasons.

Melissa Andrews of the University of Southampton questioned the likely benefit and raised concern about infection and the patient's safety ^[1]. She said she believed the chance of regeneration and functional recovery was zero, and she questioned both the rigour and the relevance of the animal evidence ^[1].

Andrew Jackson of Newcastle University was more open to the chemistry. He said PEG may help rejoin severed spinal nerves, but that it is difficult to make two adult pieces of nervous system join in a way that works ^[1]. He said he hoped supporting evidence for the surgery would be made available for peer review ^[1].

Why it matters, and why it is too early to say

Spinal-cord injury is among the injuries medicine has least been able to reverse. A cord does not heal like a broken bone. If a donated segment could be made to carry signals, the surgery would open a route that no present treatment offers. That is the size of the claim, and it is why the claim deserves checking before it deserves celebrating.

The paper's view is that the standard is simple, and it is the one Jackson names. A surgical operation is an event. A transplant is a result, and a result needs a record: what was done, what function existed before, and what exists now, measured over months by people other than the surgeon. Ren has promised a document, but a document from the team that did the operation is a description, not a test.

There are also questions the surgeons will have to answer in plain terms. Nobody has said what the Chinese specialists did in the operating room, or what supports calling this the first human spinal-cord transplant in the world. Any complications are unknown.

It is a familiar shape in medicine: a dramatic announcement first, the evidence later, sometimes much later. The announcement is already here. The next thing to watch is whether the team's promised document arrives, and whether it comes with the clinical records that other researchers can examine.