A nationwide policy shift implemented in 2018 was designed to, among other things, improve the waiting list mortality rate. One unintended consequence, however, is that patients are now more likely to experience a stroke after receiving a new heart.

Researchers focused on a relatively young patient population, hoping to learn as much as possible about the surgical valve's safety and effectiveness over an extended period of time. 

A new spending proposal that would extend government funding for another seven months does not address the Medicare payment cut that went into effect on Jan. 1. More than 100 healthcare groups, including the ACC, STS, SCCT and SCAI, are now voicing their disappointment. 

The biggest differences, researchers noted, were found in the long-term outcomes of low- and intermediate-risk patients.

How safe is it to perform cardiac surgery on a pregnant patient? When should care teams try to deliver the baby first and then complete the procedure? A team of Mayo Clinic researchers addressed those very questions, and many others, in a new analysis. 

“It has the added advantage of avoiding oral anticoagulation drugs and the risks associated with lifelong anticoagulation," one researcher explained. "In fact, most of our patients are not on any cardiac medications following one year after surgery.”

Surgery offers multiple long-term benefits when compared to a more interventional approach, though it is still associated with certain risks of its own. In the end, researchers agree, the decision is one that should involve input from surgeons, cardiologists and others.

Bioprosthetic valves are being used more and more for aortic valve replacement, but mechanical valves appear to provide better long-term outcomes for patients 60 and younger. The new study, based on data from nearly 110,000 patients, was presented at STS 2025 and published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.