Aortic valve replacement in non-elderly: the gap between reality, guidelines and evidence

OBJECTIVES There are several treatment options for non-elderly adults (18-60 years) in need of aortic valve replacement (AVR): a mechanical or biological substitute, a homograft, the Ross procedure or nowadays even transcatheter aortic valve replacement. This study evaluated the current opinions and practices of cardiac surgeons and cardiologists concerning AVR strategies in this patient group.METHODS A 43-item online survey was sent out to several scientific organizations, individual cardiac surgeons, cardiologists and residents/fellows worldwide.RESULTS Two hundred twenty-two physicians from 33 different countries answered the survey. The UK (24%), Belgium (23%) and North America (22%) are best represented. A mechanical valve is the most frequently used substitute in non-elderly. With increasing patient age, the popularity of a biological valve increases. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and the Ross procedure are each used in <10% of this cohort. Only 12% of the cardiac surgeons has experience with the Ross surgery. In 23%, the patient seems not to be involved in the decision on the type of valve substitute.CONCLUSIONS The preferred surgical treatment for non-elderly patients in need of AVR differs widely. To enable a shared decision-making process including patient preferences, there is more need for collaboration between cardiac departments, as well as education and scientific research about patient-centred outcomes of the different AVR techniques.

Automated summary

The preferred surgical treatment for non-elderly patients in need of AVR varies widely. There is a need for increased collaboration between cardiac departments and for education and scientific research on patient-centered outcomes of different AVR techniques.