Review of Ethics and Use of Animal-Based Surgical Products in Dermatology.

BACKGROUND

Animal- and human-derived materials are commonly used in dermatologic and cosmetic products, yet their presence is often unclear to clinicians and patients.

OBJECTIVE

To examine ethical and informed-consent implications of these materials, particularly when they conflict with patients' religious, cultural, or personal values.

METHODS

A narrative literature search and product formulary audit were conducted on PubMed through February 2025, augmented by United States Food and Drug Administration summaries and manufacturer dossiers. Data extraction focused on material origin, clinical use, outcomes, adverse events, and labeling transparency.

RESULTS

Numerous dermatologic products contain animal- or human-derived components, such as rooster-comb-derived hyaluronic acid, bovine collagen grafts, shark-derived glycosaminoglycans, and human-derived materials. The source of these materials is frequently absent or inconsistently reported in labeling, limiting clinicians' ability to counsel patients effectively. Studies demonstrate that when informed and given alternatives, most patients prefer nonanimal-derived options. Advances in synthetic and bioengineered materials make such alternatives increasingly feasible.

LIMITATIONS: This review is not exhaustive. Given the extent of dermatologic and cosmetic products on the market and variability in ingredient disclosure, some animal- or human-derived materials may not have been captured. Rapid product innovation and inconsistent reporting of material origins further limit comprehensive identification.

CONCLUSION

Improved transparency regarding product origins is essential for meaningful informed consent in dermatology. Incorporating brief intake screening questions and updating consent forms to disclose material sources may enhance shared decision-making, patient trust, and ethically aligned, patient-centered care.