With the rapid advancement of science and technology， human organoid technology has demonstrated immense potential in medical research and treatment， but it has also raised complex ethical issues. Ethical research on human organoid has gradually become a hot field of concern in the international academic community. Taking 262 papers from the Web of Science core database from 2016 to 2024 as a sample， this paper employed bibliometrics and visualization methods to analyze the hotspots and evolutionary trends of international research on the ethics of human organoid. The results showed that international research on the ethics of human organoid exhibited a significant growth trend， going through three phases： a slow accumulation period， a sustained explosion period， and a circuitous growth period. The primary research forces were concentrated in the United States， China， the United Kingdom， and Italy， with China gradually emerging in this domain. The research hotspots were mainly focused on the following aspects. The first was the research of classical ethical issues， encompassing an overview of the overall ethical issues in the research and application of human organoid technology， and the ethical issues of organoid biobanks. The second was the new challenges in ethical issues， including the moral status and ethical governance of brain organoids， embryoid bodies， and gonadal organoids. The third was ethical issues arising from cross-disciplinary applications， covering the ethical challenges posed by chimeras formed through transplanting human brain organoid into non-human animals and hybrids created by connecting human brain organoid with artificial intelligence （AI）， robots， and other non-biological entities. As technology continues to advance， the complexity and importance of ethical issues related to human organoid will persistently increase， and research in this field will continue to deepen and expand in the future.

Researching the extraterritorial regulatory experience of human germline genome editing (HGGE) has important reference significance for improving China's genome editing governance framework.Taking the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) as examples,they already have relatively mature practices in terms of regulatory agencies,laws and regulations,and multi-group participation.The UK incorporates germline genome editing into the regulatory scope of assisted reproduction through the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA),while the US is mainly responsible for regulation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).The experience of both countries shows that the regulatory framework for HGGE requires a regulatory agency with a clear division of responsibilities,as well as classified management and timely adjustment and revision of outdated laws and regulations to cope with development and ethical challenges of technology.Additionally,the authors believe that drawing on the consultation of various international and national organizations and increasing public participation is crucial to establishing correct values.It is recommended that China should clarify the regulatory responsibilities of institutions,formulate prove effective provisions of legal and regulatory,and promote multi-party dialogue and public participation.