Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 454

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Anatomy of the pig heart: comparisons with normal human cardiac structure

CRICK, SIMON J., SHEPPARD, MARY N., HO, SIEW YEN, GEBSTEIN, LIOR, ANDERSON, ROBERT H.·1998·Journal of Anatomy

Abstract

Transgenic technology has potentially solved many of the immunological difficulties of using pig organs to support life in the human recipient. Nevertheless, other problems still remain. Knowledge of cardiac anatomy of the pig (Sus scrofa) is limited despite the general acceptance in the literature that it is similar to that of man. A qualitative analysis of porcine and human cardiac anatomy was achieved by gross examination and dissection of hearts with macrophotography. The porcine organ had a classic ‘Valentine heart’ shape, reflecting its location within the thorax and to the orientation of the pig's body (unguligrade stance). The human heart, in contrast, was trapezoidal in silhouette, reflecting man's orthograde posture. The morphologically right atrium of the pig was characterised by the tubular shape of its appendage (a feature observed on the left in the human heart). The porcine superior and inferior caval veins opened into the atrium at right angles to one another, whereas in man the orifices were directly in line. A prominent left azygous vein (comparable to the much reduced left superior caval or oblique vein in man) entered on the left side of the pig heart and drained via the coronary sinus. The porcine left atrium received only 2 pulmonary veins, whereas 4 orifices were generally observed in man. The sweep between the inlet and outlet components of the porcine right ventricle was less marked than in man, and a prominent muscular moderator band was situated in a much higher position within the porcine right ventricle compared with that of man. The apical components of both porcine ventricles possessed very coarse trabeculations, much broader than those observed in the human ventricles. In general, aortic‐mitral fibrous continuity was reduced in the outlet component of the porcine left ventricle, with approximately two‐thirds of the aortic valve being supported by left ventricular musculature. Several potentially significant differences exist between porcine and human hearts. It is important that these differences are considered as the arguments continue concerning the use of transgenic pig hearts for xenotransplantation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1469-7580.1998.19310105.x

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 454

Metadata

Authors
CRICK, S. J., SHEPPARD, M. N., HO, S. Y., GEBSTEIN, L., & ANDERSON, R. H.
Venue
Journal of Anatomy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1998-07
Volume
193
Issue
1
Pages
105-119
ISSN
  • 0021-8782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7580
OpenAlex
W2115832656
Cited by
454
References
8
FWCI
5.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Anatomy of the pig heart: comparisons with normal human cardiac structure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1469-7580.1998.19310105.x
The paper
CRICK, S. J., SHEPPARD, M. N., HO, S. Y., GEBSTEIN, L., & ANDERSON, R. H. (1998). Anatomy of the pig heart: comparisons with normal human cardiac structure. Journal of Anatomy. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-7580.1998.19310105.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.