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

Abstract

Abstract 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.