Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Oct;25(5):519-525.
doi: 10.1097/MOT.0000000000000806.

Ethical decision-making in simultaneous heart-liver transplantation

Affiliations
Review

Ethical decision-making in simultaneous heart-liver transplantation

Xinxing S Cheng et al. Curr Opin Organ Transplant. 2020 Oct.

Abstract

Purpose of review: Simultaneous heart-liver (SHL) transplants are only a small proportion of overall heart and liver transplantation, they have been increasing in frequency and thus challenge the equitable allocation of organs.

Recent findings: The incidence of SHL transplants is reviewed along with the outcomes of SHL transplants and their impact on the waitlist, particularly in the context of solitary heart and liver transplantation. The ethical implications, most importantly the principles of utility and equity, of SHL transplant are addressed. In the context of utility, the distinction of a transplant being life-saving versus life-enhancing is investigated. The risk of hepatic decompensation for those awaiting both solitary and combined organ transplantation is an important consideration for the principle of equity. Lastly, the lack of standardization of programmatic approaches to SHL transplant candidates, the national approach to allocation, and the criteria by which programs are evaluated are reviewed.

Summary: As with all multiorgan transplantation, SHL transplantation raises ethical issues of utility and equity. Given the unique patient population, good outcomes, lack of alternatives, and overall small numbers, we feel there is continued ethical justification for SHL, but a more standardized nationwide approach to the evaluation, listing, and allocation of organs is warranted.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Peng E, O'Sullivan JJ, Griselli M, et al. Durable ventricular assist device support for failing systemic morphologic right ventricle: early results. Ann Thorac Surg 2014; 98:21222129.
    1. Elwir S, Lake J. Current status of liver allocation in the United States. Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 12:166170.
    1. Goldberg DS, Reese PP, Amaral S, Abt PL. Reframing the impact of combined heart–liver allocation on liver transplant wait-list candidates. Liver Transpl 2014; 20:13561364.
    1. Sulewski ME, Wolf JH, Hasz R, et al. Combined heart–liver transplantation; implications for liver-alone wait list mortality. Transplantation 2014; 98:e45e47.
    1. Edwards EB, Harper AM, Hirose R, Mulligan DC. The impact of broader regional sharing of livers: 2-year results of ‘Share 35’. Liver Transpl 2016; 22:399409.

MeSH terms