Key result
Modified unicaval drainage for thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair resulted in a 30-day mortality of 4.5% compared to 8.7% with conventional bicaval drainage.
Why the study?
The feasibility, safety, and clinical effect of modified unicaval drainage compared with conventional bicaval drainage for thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair required investigation.
Does modified unicaval drainage improve clinical outcomes compared to conventional bicaval drainage in patients undergoing thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair?
Cohort (n=45)
Does modified unicaval drainage improve clinical outcomes compared to conventional bicaval drainage in patients undergoing thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair?
Modified unicaval drainage provides satisfactory exposure and equivalent clinical outcomes to conventional bicaval drainage for thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair, potentially simplifying the procedure.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support modified unicaval drainage feasibility; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility, safety, and clinical effect of modified unicaval drainage for thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair, compared with conventional bicaval drainage. METHODS: A total of 45 consecutive cases of patients who underwent thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair on beating-heart were enrolled and divided into two groups according to the different venous drainage (Group A: modified unicaval drainage, Group B: conventional bicaval drainage). A retrospective analysis of perioperative data and clinical outcomes were performed and all the surviving cases were followed up. Re-evaluation of echocardiography and electrocardiogram was performed prior to discharge, and at first month, sixth month, and every year follow-up. RESULTS: The overall postoperative 30-day mortality was 4.5% in Group A and 8.7% in Group B. The postoperative tricuspid valve regurgitation grade of both groups decreased significantly from preoperative regurgitation grade, p < 0.001, without intergroup significant difference, p = 0.815. Follow-up duration ranged from 6 to 38 months, there was one death at 24 months in Group A, and another at 9 months in Group B, respectively. Nobody from both groups experienced reintervention for residual tricuspid regurgitation. No significant difference could be identified about the incidence of postoperative morbidities and follow-up adverse events. CONCLUSION: Both strategies of caval venous drainage can provide satisfactory exposure for thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair and equivalent favorable postoperative outcome. And the modified unicaval drainage group may even preserve the anesthetic time and decrease the risk of iatrogenic jugular injury, achieving a more simplified procedure with better cosmetic outcome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
He et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair (n=45). Modified unicaval drainage vs. Conventional bicaval drainage was evaluated on postoperative 30-day mortality. Modified unicaval drainage for thoracoscopic reoperative isolated tricuspid valve repair resulted in a 30-day mortality of 4.5% compared to 8.7% with conventional bicaval drainage.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: