Even for patients aged 60 years, event-free life expectancy is better with a bioprosthesis. Although the chance of reoperation is higher, the lifetime risk of bleeding is lower compared with a mechanical prosthesis. Comparing lifetime event risks between different types of valve prostheses provides more insight into patient outcome after aortic valve replacement and aids patient selection and counseling.

A large proportion (56%) of symptomatic patients does not undergo aortic valve replacement. Often operative risk is estimated (too) high or hemodynamic severity and symptomatic status are misclassified. Interdisciplinary team discussions between cardiologists and surgeons should be encouraged to optimize patient selection for surgery.

Background The disease burden of patients with severe aortic stenosis is not often explored, while the incidence is increasing and many patients who have an indication for aortic valve replacement are not referred for surgery. We studied the quality of life of 191 patients with severe aortic stenosis, hypothesising that symptomatic patients have a far worse quality of life than the general population, which could enforce the indication for surgery. Methods The SF-36v2 Health Survey was completed by 191 consecutive patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis.

ObjectiveTo provide insight into professionals’ perceptions of and experiences with shared decision-making (SDM) in the treatment of symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).MethodsA semistructured interview study was performed in the heart centres of academic and large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands between June and December 2020. Cardiothoracic surgeons, interventional cardiologists, nurse practitioners and physician assistants (n=21) involved in the decision-making process for treatment of severe AS were interviewed. An inductive thematic analysis was used to identify, analyse and report patterns in the data.ResultsFour primary themes were generated: (1) the concept of SDM, (2) knowledge, (3) communication and interaction, and (4) implementation of SDM. Not all respondents considered patient participation as an element of SDM. They experienced a discrepancy between patients’ wishes and treatment options. Respondents explained that not knowing patient preferences for health improvement hinders SDM and complicating patient characteristics for patient participation were perceived. A shared responsibility for improving SDM was suggested for patients and all professionals involved in the decision-making process for severe AS.ConclusionsProfessionals struggle to make highly complex treatment decisions part of SDM and to embed patients’ expectations of treatment and patients’ preferences. Additionally, organisational constraints complicate the SDM process. To ensure sustainable high-quality care, professionals should increase their awareness of patient participation in SDM, and collaboration in the pathway for decision-making in severe AS is required to support the documentation and availability of information according to the principles of SDM.