Narrative review shows smaller bioprosthetic valves increase reoperation rates in surgical AVR, suggesting larger sizes may improve outcomes.
Background: Surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement is a ubiquitous procedure, with several factors identified in affecting outcomes. We hypothesize that smaller valves may be associated with worse outcomes and decreased freedom from clinical events, and a shift in implanting larger valves whenever possible may confer benefit to the patient. Methods: A narrative review of the literature was conducted using a systematic search strategy to evaluate studies examining the relationship between bioprosthetic valve size and outcomes. Inclusion criteria focused on studies reporting paired data on valve size and clinical endpoints in surgical AVR. Results: Among the 15 reviewed studies, smaller valve sizes were consistently associated with higher post-operative transvalvular gradients (6/7 studies) and increased reintervention rates (5/8 studies). Associations with accelerated structural valve degeneration (SVD) (3/5 studies) and reduced survival (8/11 studies) were also observed, although heterogeneity in study design and follow-up durations limited definitive conclusions. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that larger valve sizes may improve freedom from SVD, reduce reintervention rates, and enhanced survival. This may also justify the slight increased risk of enlarging the aortic root to accommodate a larger bioprosthetic valve prosthesis. Further high-quality, controlled studies are needed to clarify the independent impact of valve size on long-term outcomes and guide surgical decision-making.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: