Key result
Tricuspid valve intervention is linked to better 2-year survival in severe TR with preserved LVEF only.
Why the study?
The impact of treatment for tricuspid regurgitation across different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction remains uncertain.
Does surgical or transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention improve two-year survival compared to conservative management in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation across different LVEF categories?
Does surgical or transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention improve two-year survival compared to conservative management in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation across different LVEF categories?
Tricuspid valve interventions improve survival in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation and preserved LVEF, but this benefit is not observed in those with mildly reduced or reduced LVEF, highlighting the importance of patient selection.
May support LVEF-guided selection for tricuspid intervention in severe TR; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
Background The impact of treatment for tricuspid regurgitation (TR) across different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains uncertain. Purpose This study aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical and transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions (TTVI) to conservative (medical) management across all LVEF categories. Methods Patients with severe isolated TR from the TRIGISTRY, a multicenter international registry, were categorized based on LVEF (preserved EF-pEF:≥50%, mildly reduced EF-mrEF:41–49%, and reduced EF-rEF:≤40%). We assessed the impact of treatment modality and procedural success, defined as residual TR ≤mild-to-moderate, on two-year survival within each LVEF category. Results Among 2,384 patients, 1,383 had pEF, 400 had mrEF, and 601 had rEF. Compared to conservative management, surgery (P<0.0005) and TTVI (P<0.0001) were associated with a survival benefit in patients with pEF. No significant survival advantage was observed in patients with mrEF (P=0.28 for both), nor in those with rEF (P=0.76 and P=0.22 respectively). Similar results were obtained when surgical and transcatheter interventions were grouped together (P<0.0001, P=0.17 and P=0.29 in patients with pEF, mrEF and rEF respectively). Patients with significant residual TR after TTVI exhibited a trend toward worse survival compared to those managed conservatively across all LVEF categories (P=0.47, P=0.33, and P=0.008 respectively)(Figure 1). Conclusion Tricuspid valve intervention, whether surgical or transcatheter-based, was associated with improved survival in patients with preserved LVEF but not in those with mildly reduced or reduced LVEF. Residual TR remained a significant prognostic factor across the entire LVEF spectrum. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection when considering tricuspid interventions in individuals with reduced LVEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heitzinger et al. (2025) studied this question. Tricuspid valve intervention improved 2-year survival in severe TR patients with preserved LVEF (≥50%) but not in those with mildly reduced or reduced LVEF.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: