Background: Outcome of surgery for acute Stanford type A aortic dissection extends beyond mortality and morbidity. More than one operative strategy is available but little is known regarding their influence on quality of life. This study analyzes the influence of defensive and aggressive operative strategies on the patients' midterm quality of life (QoL). Methods: From July 2007 to July 2010, 95 patients underwent surgery for acute Stanford type A aortic dissection in our institution. Patients who survived the procedure, gave consent to inclusion in the institution prospective registry, completed at least 2-years of follow-up protocol, and answered two quality of life questionnaires (SF-36 and WHO-QOL-BREF) were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to operative strategy: defensive (DS) with replacement of the ascending aorta only, and aggressive (AS) with replacement of the ascending aorta, aortic arch with/out a frozen elephant trunk procedure. The preoperative, operative, postoperative and the midterm QoL were analyzed and compared. Results: 39 patients were included in the study. The DS group had a shorter operative time (184 ± 54 versus 276 ± 110 minutes respectively, P = .001). The AS group had higher incidence of dialysis (31% versus 4% respectively, P = .038). The midterm QoL analysis showed a collective lower value than the normal population. In the SF-36, DS performed better in all categories but with no statistical significance. In the WHO-QOL-BREF, DS performed significantly better in the global life quality and psychological health categories (P = .038 and .049 respectively). Conclusion: In Stanford type A aortic dissection, adopting an aggressive surgical strategy does not improve the quality of life in midterm follow-up compared to a defensive strategy. Unless the clinical setting dictates an aggressive management strategy, a defensive strategy can be safely adopted.