Key result
Combined MR and TR linked to ~29% higher mortality than isolated MR in symptomatic patients.
Why the study?
Combined MR and TR causes more complicated hemodynamic burdens than isolated regurgitation, prompting investigation of its clinical characteristics, outcomes, and prognostic instruments.
Does combined MR and TR worsen outcomes compared to isolated MR in patients with ≥ moderate valvular regurgitation?
Cohort (n=6,704)
Does combined MR and TR worsen outcomes compared to isolated MR in patients with ≥ moderate valvular regurgitation?
Effect estimate: HR 0.776 (95% CI 0.616-0.978)
p-value: p=0.031
Combined MR and TR is associated with worse clinical profiles and poorer 2-year outcomes compared to isolated MR, highlighting the need for dedicated prognostic tools for risk stratification.
Supports closer monitoring for patients with combined MR and TR; leaves open whether simultaneous transcatheter or.
BACKGROUND: Combined mitral regurgitation (MR) and tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is related to more complicated hemodynamic burdens than isolated atrioventricular valve regurgitation. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate clinical characteristics and outcomes of combined MR and TR, as well as developing dedicated prognostic instruments. METHODS: A total of 6,704 patients with ≥ moderate MR or TR from the China Valvular Heart Disease study were included in this analysis. The study outcomes included all-cause mortality, death or hospitalization for heart failure, and worsening functional status or death within 2 years. RESULTS: Compared with those with isolated valvular regurgitation, patients with combined MR and TR more often experienced atrial fibrillation or flutter and pulmonary hypertension. During a median follow-up of 733 days (Q1, Q3: 706, 749 days), 624 (9.3%) deaths occurred. Combined MR and TR was related to poorer 2-year outcomes than isolated MR, and was independently associated with worse prognosis in symptomatic patients (all-cause mortality: MR vs MR+TR, HR: 0.776 [95% CI: 0.616-0.978]; P = 0.031) and those with normal left ventricular systolic function (composite endpoint: HR: 0.629 [95% CI: 0.400-0.990]; P = 0.045). Based on carefully evaluated predictors of mortality, a prognostic nomogram and a risk score were developed and externally validated for patients with combined MR and TR, with superior predictive performance than the MitraScore and comparable discrimination compared with artificial intelligence-derived models. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with combined MR and TR displayed worse clinical profiles and poorer outcomes compared with those with isolated MR. The novel prognostic tools may improve personalized risk assessment of combined MR and TR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lv et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Combined mitral and tricuspid regurgitation (n=6,704). Combined mitral and tricuspid regurgitation vs. Isolated mitral regurgitation was evaluated on All-cause mortality, death or hospitalization for heart failure, and worsening functional status or death within 2 years (HR 0.776, 95% CI 0.616-0.978, p=0.031). Combined mitral and tricuspid regurgitation was associated with worse all-cause mortality than isolated mitral regurgitation in symptomatic patients (MR vs MR+TR HR 0.776; 95% CI 0.616-0.978; P=0.031).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: