Key result
Ross procedure preserves long-term HRQoL and outperforms mechanical AVR across select quality-of-life domains.
Why the study?
The Ross procedure provides a living autologous aortic valve substitute and avoids lifelong anticoagulation, but its effect on health-related quality of life relative to alternative aortic valve strategies remained incompletely defined.
Does the Ross procedure improve postoperative health-related quality of life compared to alternative aortic valve strategies in patients undergoing aortic valve surgery?
Systematic Review
Does the Ross procedure improve postoperative health-related quality of life compared to alternative aortic valve strategies in patients undergoing aortic valve surgery?
Long-term health-related quality of life is generally preserved following the Ross procedure with selected domain-level advantages over mechanical and homograft valves, though current heterogeneous observational evidence does not establish global superiority.
The Ross procedure provides a living autologous aortic valve substitute and avoids lifelong anticoagulation, but its effect on health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) relative to alternative aortic valve strategies remains incompletely defined. We conducted a systematic review of studies published from January 2000 to 17 September 2026 evaluating postoperative HRQoL after the Ross procedure using validated patient‐reported outcome instruments. Twelve studies met the eligibility criteria. Six directly compared Ross recipients with mechanical aortic valve replacement (mAVR): three reported significantly better Ross outcomes in at least one SF‐36 domain, one favoured the mechanical group in selected domains, and two found no significant difference. A randomised comparison with homograft aortic root replacement demonstrated higher physical functioning, general health and physical component scores after Ross at long‐term follow‐up. Comparisons with aortic valve repair were generally similar. Paediatric and young‐adult studies demonstrated generally preserved HRQoL compared with healthy or relevant reference populations, although psychological concerns were identified in selected cohorts. Contemporary long‐term data using PROMIS‐10 and MacNew similarly demonstrated preserved physical and favourable mental and disease‐specific HRQoL after Ross. Important limitations included substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity, absence of preoperative HRQoL in most studies, residual confounding in observational comparisons and selection/non‐response bias. Available evidence suggests that long‐term HRQoL after the Ross procedure is generally preserved, with selected domain‐level advantages reported against mAVR and homograft comparators. However, the heterogeneous and predominantly observational evidence base does not establish global HRQoL superiority of Ross over alternative aortic valve procedures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dhakal et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Aortic valve disease requiring Ross procedure. Ross procedure vs. Alternative aortic valve strategies (mechanical aortic valve replacement, homograft aortic root replacement, aortic valve repair, or reference populations) was evaluated on Postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using validated patient-reported outcome instruments (e.g., SF-36, PROMIS-10, MacNew). The Ross procedure generally preserved long-term HRQoL across 12 studies and outperformed mechanical AVR in at least one SF-36 domain in 3 of 6 comparative studies.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: