Durability of transcath- eter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves in patients at lower surgical risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:546 53. 11.2.1. Selection of Prosthetic Valve Type: Bioprosthetic Versus Mechanical Valve 1. Goldstone AB, Chiu P, Baiocchi M, et al. Mechanical or biologic pros- theses for aortic-valve and mitral-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1847 57. 2. Badhwar V, Ofenloch JC, Rovin JD, et al. Noninferiority of closely moni- tored mechanical valves to bioprostheses overshadowed by early mortality benefit in younger patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;93:748 53. 3. Brown ML, Schaff HV, Lahr BD, et al. Aortic valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 70 years: improved outcome with mechanical versus biologic prostheses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;135:878 84. 4. van Geldorp MWA, Eric Jamieson WR, Kappetein AP, et al. Patient out- come after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical or biological pros- thesis: weighing lifetime anticoagulant-related event risk against reopera- tion risk. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:881 6, 866.e1 5. 5. Kulik A, B dard P, Lam B-K, et al. Mechanical versus bioprosthetic valve replacement in middle-aged patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;30:485 91. 6. Glaser N, Jackson V, Holzmann MJ, et al. Aortic valve replacement with mechanical vs. biological prostheses in patients aged 50 69 years. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:2658 67. 7. Chikwe J, Chiang YP, Egorova NN, et al. Survival and outcomes following bioprosthetic vs mechanical mitral valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 69 years. JAMA. 2015;313:1435 42. 8. McClure RS, McGurk S, Cevasco M, et al. Late outcomes comparison of nonelderly patients with stented bioprosthetic and mechanical valves in the aortic position: a propensity-matched analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148:1931 9. 9. Chiang YP, Chikwe J, Moskowitz AJ, et al. 