Quality of life after mechanical vs. biological aortic valve replacement

Anas Aboud, Martin Breuer, Torsten Bossert, Jan F. Gummert, Martin Zhong*

*Corresponding author for this work
15 Citations (Scopus)


To assess the quality of life after biological and mechanical aortic valve replacement, data of 136 patients were assessed retrospectively after 2 years of follow-up. Bioprostheses were implanted in 53 patients with a mean age of 74 years, and mechanical prostheses were used in 83 with a mean age of 64 years; there were 47 women and 89 men. Quality of life was evaluated using the Short Form 36-Item Health Survey questionnaire. Physical function scores were significantly better in patients with a mechanical prosthesis. Mental health indices were identical in both groups. Younger patients with mechanical valves and older patients with biological valves had significantly better item scores. In all age groups, men tended to have better scores than women, but a significant difference was noted only in the physical functioning index. The quality of life in patients with mechanical and biological valves was similar at 2 years postoperatively.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAsian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals
Issue number1
Pages (from-to)35-38
Number of pages4
Publication statusPublished - 2009


Dive into the research topics of 'Quality of life after mechanical vs. biological aortic valve replacement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this