Send to

Choose Destination
Can J Cardiol. 2011 Mar-Apr;27(2):262.e15-20. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2010.12.034.

Midterm outcomes and quality of life of aortic root replacement: mechanical vs biological conduits.

Author information

The University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.



Aortic root replacement is a complex operation for severe aortic root pathology such as aneurysms and dissections with concomitant aortic valve disease. Biological and mechanical valve conduits are available.


Early and midterm results were analyzed in patients undergoing aortic root replacement. From January 1, 1998, to May 31, 2007, 144 patients underwent aortic root replacement (Bentall procedures) with either a mechanical (n = 51) or a biological (n = 93) valve conduit. Cox proportional hazard analysis was used to determine whether valve type was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality, and analysis of covariance was used to compare general and disease-specific health-related quality-of-life scores.


Operative mortality was 2.1%. Median follow-up time was 40 months; 1- and 5-year survival rates for the mechanical group were 96.0% and 89.0%, respectively, vs 93.0% and 84.0% for the biological group. Valve type was not predictive of all-cause mortality, and valve-related complications were not significantly different between groups. At follow-up, 31.5% of patients in the biological group were on anticoagulant. General and disease-specific health-related quality-of-life scores were not significantly different between groups.


Aortic root replacement with either mechanical or biological valved conduits is a safe procedure. Morbidity, mortality, and adverse quality of life were not associated with the type of valve conduit. Further studies are required to assess long-term durability of biological valve conduits used for aortic root replacement.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center