Heart transplant eligibility criteria have evolved from rigid exclusions to individualized risk assessments, acknowledging modifiable factors for candidates.
This review highlights the paradigm shift in heart transplant listing guidelines from rigid categorical exclusions to individualized risk assessments.
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 0%
Heart transplantation represents the definitive therapeutic intervention and gold standard treatment for patients with end-stage heart failure that remains refractory to medical management and advanced treatment modalities. The process of identifying appropriate candidates for transplantation requires comprehensive, multifaceted, and continuously evolving evaluation protocols before formal listing on the transplant waiting list. The scarcity of suitable donor organs, coupled with significant wait list mortality, perioperative risks, post-transplant complications, and the imperative to optimize allocation of this limited resource, creates a complex landscape where specific indications and contraindications to listing must be carefully defined and applied. Historically, transplant eligibility criteria were characterized by rigid, categorical exclusions. However, as both the art and science of heart transplantation have progressively advanced, the traditional contraindications to being listed for heart transplant have undergone substantial modification. Contemporary practice increasingly emphasizes individualized risk assessment rather than absolute exclusionary thresholds, recognizing that many historically prohibitive factors may be modifiable through appropriate bridging strategies, medical optimization, and support interventions. In this review, we highlight and analyze the specific ways in which transplant eligibility criteria have evolved across multiple domains including age and frailty assessment, obesity and metabolic factors, infectious disease considerations, hemodynamic parameters, oncologic history, and psychosocial determinants. Furthermore, we critically discuss the broad implications of these shifting paradigms for clinical practice, ethical considerations regarding equitable organ allocation, healthcare resource utilization, and future research priorities to maximize both individual patient benefit and collective societal utility of this scarce and life-saving therapeutic resource.
Whiteson et al. (Thu,) reported a other. Heart transplant eligibility criteria have evolved from rigid exclusions to individualized risk assessments, acknowledging modifiable factors for candidates.