Why the study?
The study aimed to evaluate short- and long-term clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life in patients younger than 65 years undergoing aortic valve replacement with biological versus mechanical prostheses.
Does biological aortic valve replacement improve survival and quality of life compared to mechanical valves in patients <65 years of age?
Population
242 consecutive patients <65 years of age undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement
Comparison
Biological vs mechanical valve prostheses
Design
Retrospective single-centre propensity-matched study
Authors
Loading...
Comparable survival with bioprostheses in patients <65 years supports individualized choice; leaves open need for randomized data before practice change.
Does biological aortic valve replacement improve survival and quality of life compared to mechanical valves in patients <65 years of age?
In non-elderly patients (<65 years) undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement, biological and mechanical valves offer comparable long-term survival and quality of life, despite higher transvalvular gradients in biological valves.
Stocco et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: