Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the most common non-communicable diseases globally, taking an estimated 17.9 million lives yearly [
1]. Most of these deaths are among people older than 65 years. Forty years ago, heart operations of patients aged 70 and older or in patients bearing a high risk of complications due to increased frailty were avoided due to the increased risk of perioperative complications. Nowadays, most of the patients within a cardiac surgery department are older than 70. Operative procedures target complex morbidities and combinations of ischemic, degenerative, and functional pathologies of the heart. Procedural adoptions have met the increasing risk profile of the patients, and surgeons successfully reduced mortality. However, different therapeutic strategies may focus on better long-term outcome on the one hand or improved short-term recovery on the other hand. While it can be assumed from young patients that the desire for a high quality of life and life extension is pronounced, this balance can shift in old age. With increasing age, postoperative quality of life can be more critical for these patients. However, the knowledge about the patient’s outcome preferences (longer lifespan versus higher quality of life) is sparse in cardiac surgery and data mainly originate from partner disciplines. Regarding the treatment of angina, 83% of the patients would “accept any treatment, no matter how extreme, to return to health” [
2]. The severity of symptoms may have a deep impact on the patient ’s expectations regarding the treatment goals and the choice of treatment options. While patients suffering from heart failure decompensation predominantly wish symptomatic alleviation, recompensated patients on the other hand, might additionally focus on the extension of life expectancy [
3]. A questionnaire-based study on 662 patients who attended health centers in Spain showed that the willingness to pay for a year of life filled with quality of life was also influenced by higher education and the income of the respondents[
4]. Cancer patients are also at risk of high mortality, and more studies exist regarding the quality of life (QoL) and lifespan (LoL). The weighing up of QoL and LoL often touches on much more circumscribed periods of time, maybe perceived as more threatening, and is therefore discussed much more intensively and for longer than in cardiovascular medicine. In a study of 459 patients with advanced cancer, 55% equally valued QoL and LoL with 27% preferring QoL. This preference was stronger with older age and male gender [
5]. In another study voting on hypothetical cancer cases, more than 20% of cancer patients voted for a treatment that prolongs survival regardless of QoL, whereas only about 2% of healthy oncology health-care professionals preferred this option. Maximizing QoL at the cost of life time was acceptable for 34% of laypersons, 23% of health-care professionals but only for 15% of the patients. Thus, in cancer patients, survival dominates the therapeutic goals in contrast to healthy individuals [
6]. As a result, the severity of symptoms, as well as individual morbidity, age, gender and role as patient or practitioner, weigh therapy goals. Therefore, it is necessary to be aware that the optimal cardiovascular therapeutic concept from the practitioner's perspective does not necessarily correspond to the wishes and values of the (elderly) patients. Moreover, studies on a possible decision between QoL and LoL are missing in cardiac surgery, even though there is a general believing of heart surgeons that QoL gets more important for elderly patients.