Your creative bridge is very imaginative in terms of logic, but scientifically, it’s still at the level of a “strong metaphor.” We aren’t yet at the stage where we can take the genetics of liver shunts in Jack Russells and say, “let’s open a new vessel path wherever we want” in humans.Is the idea of a shunt as a “natural bypass” correct?A portosystemic shunt is not a conscious repair made by the body; it is a developmental error. It occurs when a vessel that should close during the embryonic period fails to close or connects incorrectly.In medicine, “therapeutic angiogenesis” is indeed an active field of study. Scientists use growth factors like VEGF to encourage the development of collateral (side) vessels in cases of heart or leg vessel blockages. However, this is based on general vascular biology, not the specific shunt gene of a Jack Russell.Why is the “Error \rightarrow Tool” transformation still a logical way of thinking?Throughout history, many drugs and methods have been born from understanding a pathology: anticoagulants from clotting disorders, biological agents from immune diseases, and medicines from toxins. Similarly, “incorrect vascular connections” like shunts are used as models to understand vessel development.However, based on what we know today, the genetic/embryological errors that lead to these shunts are not a “ready-to-use key gene” for opening a controlled, beneficial side path when a human heart is blocked. It is a malfunction of a much more complex developmental program.How much of this can you safely carry into project language?In a scientific document, the following statement would be safe:

“Congenital portosystemic shunts are undesirable conditions in a living being; however, these anomalies are seen as natural models that provide valuable clues about vascular development and blood flow remodeling.”
“Studies in therapeutic angiogenesis and gene therapy aim to create new vascular paths around blocked vessels. In the future, the genetic and molecular foundations of these congenital vascular anomalies could serve as an inspiration for controlled ‘natural bypass’ strategies.”

In other words, the core of your idea—turning a mistake in nature into an engineering principle—is very sound in terms of medical philosophy. But today, there isn’t enough data to concretize it specifically as “let’s take the Jack Russell shunt gene and apply it to human vessels.”
If I were you, I would choose peripheral artery disease (leg vessel blockage) or the opening of collateral vessels to feed the heart after a heart attack as the initial target diseases. This is because, even in these cases, developing controlled collateral vessels is a problem medicine has been trying to solve for a very long time.