Key result
Living autologous right atrial wall reconstructs severely dysplastic tricuspid valve in infant with Ebstein's anomaly.
Why the study?
Current patch materials for tricuspid leaflet reconstruction have limitations, such as unpredictable shrinkage with untreated pericardium and lack of growth potential with treated pericardium.
Case Report (n=1)
Living autologous right atrial wall may serve as a viable alternative material for tricuspid valve leaflet reconstruction in infants with Ebstein's anomaly, potentially overcoming the limitations of pericardial patches.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Should not yet change Ebstein repair practice; hypothesis-generating for autologous atrial wall use in infants.
The management of infants with Ebstein’s anomaly is challenging and requires complex involvement of the multidisciplinary team. Surgical repair technique is dependent on the degree of tricuspid leaflet dysfunction and the decision to undergo univentricular or biventricular repair. Patients with a severely dysplastic tricuspid valve are less suited to a cone repair alone and require leaflet reconstruction. Currently used patch materials include autologous untreated pericardium and treated pericardium, with limitations such as unpredictable shrinkage and no growth potential, respectively. To overcome these challenges, we used living autologous wall of the right atrium to reconstruct the tricuspid valve leaflets in a 1-year-old girl with Ebstein’s anomaly and a severely dysplastic tricuspid valve.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Konstantinov et al. (2026) conducted a case report in Ebstein's anomaly with severely dysplastic tricuspid valve (n=1). Reconstruction of tricuspid valve leaflets using living autologous wall of the right atrium was evaluated. Living autologous wall of the right atrium was successfully used to reconstruct the tricuspid valve leaflets in a 1-year-old girl with Ebstein's anomaly and a severely dysplastic tricuspid valve.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: