ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2017
Evaluation of a Heart Transplant Candidate.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Outcomes of Colonoscopy in Cardiac Transplant Candidates with Severely Versus Non-severely Reduced Left Ventricular Function: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
- Sleeve gastrectomy facilitates weight loss and permits cardiac transplantation in patients with severe obesity and a left ventricular assist device (LVAD).Surgical endoscopy · 2023Review
- The ABC of Heart Transplantation-Part 1: Indication, Eligibility, Donor Selection, and Surgical Technique.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Benefits of both physical assessment and electronic health record review to assess frailty prior to heart transplant.Clinical transplantation · 2022Observational
- Heart Transplant in Older Adults.Current transplantation reports · 2022Review
- How does severe functional mitral regurgitation redefined by European guidelines affect pulmonary vascular resistance and hemodynamics in heart transplant candidates?Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2021Article
- Solid organ transplantation in older adults. Infectious and other age-related considerations.OBM transplantation · 2019Article
- Osteopathic approach with a patient undergoing cardiac transplantation: the five diaphragms.International medical case reports journal · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewHeart transplantation is the best option for irreversible and critically advanced heart failure. However, limited donor pool, the risk of rejection, infection, and right ventricular dysfunction in short-term post-transplant period, as well as, the development of coronary allograft vasculopathy and malignancy in the long-term post-transplant period limits the utility of heart transplantation for all comers with advanced heart failure. Therefore, selection of appropriate candidates is very important for the best short and long-term prognosis. In this article, we discuss the principles of selection of candidates and compare to the recently updated International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) listing criteria with the goal of updating current clinical practice. RECENT
findingsWe found that while most of the recommendations in the new listing criteria are continuous with the previous criteria, updated recommendations are made on the risk stratification models in choosing transplantation candidates. Recommendation on hepatic dysfunction is not directly included in the updated ISHLT listing criteria; however, adoption of the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and modified MELD scores in the evaluation of risk are suggested in recent studies. In conclusion, evaluation of patient selection for heart transplantation should be comprehensive and individualized with respect to indications and the risk of comorbidities of candidates. With the advancement of mechanical circulatory support (MCS), the selection of heart transplantation candidate is continuously evolving and widened. MCS as bridge to candidacy should be considered when the candidate has potentially reversible risk factors for transplantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.