Key result
Tricuspid valve replacement provided better 10-year survival compared with tricuspid valvuloplasty in patients with a systemic right ventricle.
Why the study?
Long-term outcomes comparing tricuspid valvuloplasty and replacement for significant tricuspid regurgitation in patients with a systemic right ventricle were not well defined.
Cohort (n=34)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
TV replacement was associated with better survival than valvuloplasty for TR in systemic RV; leaves open prospective confirmation before practice change.
Objective The purpose of this study is to compare the long-term outcomes of 2 different tricuspid surgeries including valvuloplasty and replacement for significant tricuspid regurgitation in patients with systemic right ventricle. Method This is a retrospective study of 34 patients with dextro-transposition of the great arteries or levo-transposition of the great arteries with biventricular circulation and systemic right ventricle undergoing tricuspid valve surgery between April 1979 and April 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the procedure: tricuspid valvuloplasty (n = 11) and tricuspid valve replacement (n = 23). These groups were compared in terms of survival, tricuspid valve dysfunction, and tricuspid valve–related reoperation. Results There was no significant difference between the groups in operative age, body weight, the proportion of dextro-transposition of the great arteries, Ebstein-like tricuspid dysplasia, and preoperative right ventricular volume/function. During the median follow-up of 9.7 years, there was 1 early death (tricuspid valvuloplasty group) and 4 late deaths (3 in tricuspid valvuloplasty group and 1 in tricuspid valve replacement group). There were 7 tricuspid valve dysfunctions, including 6 significant tricuspid regurgitations in the tricuspid valvuloplasty group and 1 prosthetic valve dysfunction in the tricuspid valve replacement group, and 4 tricuspid valve-related reoperations (3 in the tricuspid valvuloplasty group and 1 in the tricuspid valve replacement group) were performed. There were significant differences between the groups in survival (tricuspid valvuloplasty vs tricuspid valve replacement: 72.7 vs 94.7% at 10 years after surgery, P = .0328) and cumulative incidence of tricuspid valve dysfunction at 10 years after tricuspid surgery (tricuspid valvuloplasty vs tricuspid valve replacement: 27.3% vs 0%, P = .0121). Conclusions Tricuspid valve replacement provided better long-term survival and tricuspid function in patients with systemic right ventricle compared with tricuspid valvuloplasty.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Furuta et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in significant tricuspid regurgitation in patients with systemic right ventricle (n=34). Tricuspid valve replacement vs. Tricuspid valvuloplasty was evaluated on survival at 10 years after surgery (p=0.0328). Tricuspid valve replacement provided better 10-year survival compared with tricuspid valvuloplasty in patients with a systemic right ventricle.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: