Key result
Tricuspid valve septal and chordal detachment for VSD closure showed no significant difference in postoperative tricuspid regurgitation compared to classical transatrial closure (P=0.969 and P=0.502).
Why the study?
The study compared transatrial closure, tricuspid valve septal detachment, and tricuspid valve chordal detachment techniques for ventricular septal defect closure.
Does the surgical technique (tricuspid valve septal or chordal detachment vs classical transatrial closure) affect the incidence of tricuspid regurgitation, residual VSD, or AV block in patients undergoing VSD closure?
Cohort (n=117)
No
Does the surgical technique (tricuspid valve septal or chordal detachment vs classical transatrial closure) affect the incidence of tricuspid regurgitation, residual VSD, or AV block in patients undergoing VSD closure?
p-value: P=0.969 and P=0.502
Tricuspid valve septal detachment and chordal detachment are as safe and effective as classical transatrial closure for VSD, with no significant differences in postoperative TR or AV block.
INTRODUCTION: We compared transatrial closure, tricuspid valve septal detachment, and tricuspid valve chordal detachment techniques for ventricular septal defect (VSD) closure. METHODS: Patients who had VSD closure with three different techniques in our clinic between September 2016 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 117 patients were included in the study. The patients were divided into three groups: group 1, classical transatrial closure; group 2, closure with tricuspid valve septal detachment; and group 3, closure with tricuspid valve chordal detachment. The groups were evaluated by serial transthoracic echocardiography (preoperative, postoperative 1st day, postoperative 1st month). Cardiac rhythm checks and recordings were performed. RESULTS: No residual VSD was observed in early or late periods in any of the groups whose VSD closure was performed with the three different techniques. No severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) was detected during the early and late postoperative periods of all operating procedures. When the groups were compared in terms of early/late TR after the operation (without TR+trace amount of TR and mild TR+moderate TR were compared), no statistically significant difference was found (P>0,05; P=0,969 and P>0,05; P=0,502). CONCLUSION: In this study, we found no statistically significant difference between three VSD closure techniques in terms of early TR, late TR, residual VSD, and permanent atrioventricular complete block during postoperative period. We hope that our results will be supported by the results of researches that are being made about this subject in large series.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Çelık et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Ventricular Septal Defect (n=117). Tricuspid valve septal detachment and tricuspid valve chordal detachment vs. Classical transatrial closure was evaluated on Early and late tricuspid regurgitation (p=P=0.969 and P=0.502). Tricuspid valve septal and chordal detachment for VSD closure showed no significant difference in postoperative tricuspid regurgitation compared to classical transatrial closure (P=0.969 and P=0.502).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: