This is a difficult question and the answer is uncertain. The authors
review the state of the art of the three methods in 1993. Cardiac tran
splantation seems to have attained its maturity. The annual number of
transplant operations is stagnant and the results progress little. Fun
ctional rehabilitation is excellent, the essential immunosuppression w
hich has not changed in principle over the last 12 years, remains prej
udicial. Cardiomyoplasty is an attractive concept with difficult surgi
cal indications (Stage III, moderately dilated cardiomyopathy with goo
d right ventricular function without arryhthmias, pulmonary hypertensi
on or mitral regurgitation), a delayed efficacy, a hospital mortality
comparable with that of transplantation and a similar survival rate. T
he objective results ar not as good as the more subjective functional
improvement. This limited experience (about 500 patients in 50 centers
throughout the world, 70 % of whom are European) should be continued
and evaluated in the centers which initiated it. The artificial heart
is only a temporary though essential therapeutic option in certain ext
remely urgent situations. It is a form of circulatory assistance, rang
ing from the simple univentricular accessory pump to the univentricula
r (Novacor) or biventricular (Jarvik) heart, in a rapidly evolving tec
hnology with problems of energy sources, marketing, cost and also clin
ical management which is often difficult especially with respect to co
agulation. What do the next ten years hold in store for us ? A nex imm
unosuppressor or the xenograft ? A more efficient cardiomyoplasty with
more precise medications ? A totally implantable autonomous artificia
l heart ? Can economic considerations accompany this development ? Thi
s is undoubtedly the deepest source of concern for the future.