Key result
Tricuspid valve replacement for functional tricuspid regurgitation was associated with higher early mortality (9% vs 3%) and worse late survival (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.03-1.79) compared to repair.
Why the study?
Functional tricuspid regurgitation is usually amenable to repair, with fewer patients requiring replacement, prompting an evaluation of institutional surgical outcomes.
Does tricuspid valve repair improve survival compared to tricuspid valve replacement in adult patients with functional tricuspid regurgitation?
Cohort (n=926)
Does tricuspid valve repair improve survival compared to tricuspid valve replacement in adult patients with functional tricuspid regurgitation?
Tricuspid valve repair for functional tricuspid regurgitation is associated with significantly better early and late survival compared to valve replacement.
OBJECTIVES: Functional tricuspid regurgitation (fTR) has been amenable to tricuspid valve repair (TVr), with fewer patients needing tricuspid valve replacement (TVR). We sought to review our experience of tricuspid valve surgery for fTR. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent primary tricuspid valve surgery for fTR (n = 926; mean age 68.6 ± 12.5 years; 67% females) from January 1993 through June 2018 was conducted. There were 767 (83%) patients who underwent TVr (ring annuloplasty, 67%; purse-string annuloplasty, 33%) and 159 (17%) underwent TVR (bioprosthetic valves, 87%; mechanical valves, 13%). The median follow-up was 8.2 years [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.2-8.9 years]. RESULTS: A greater proportion of patients who underwent TVR had severe right ventricular dysfunction (P < 0.001), severe tricuspid regurgitation (P < 0.001) and congestive heart failure (P = 0.001) while the TVr cohort had a greater proportion with severe mitral valve (MV) regurgitation (P < 0.001) and concomitant cardiac procedures. Early mortality (TVR, 9% vs TVr, 3%; P = 0.004), renal failure (TVR, 10% vs TVr, 5%; P = 0.014) and hospital stay (TVR, 15 ± 15 days vs TVr, 12 ± 11 days; P < 0.001) were greater in TVR patients. The TVR cohort had worse survival [hazard ratio (HR) 1.57; 95% CI 1.23-1.99]. Multivariable analysis identified congestive heart failure (HR 1.37; 95% CI 1.10-1.72), renal failure (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.14-2.82), previous MV surgery (HR 1.35; 95% CI 1.05-1.72) and TVR (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.03-1.79) as independent risk factors for late mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Tricuspid repair for fTR appears to have better early and late outcomes. Since previous MV surgery and TVR are identified as independent risk factors for late mortality, concomitant TVr at the time of index MV surgery may be considered. Early referral before the onset of advanced heart failure may improve outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pahwa et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in functional tricuspid regurgitation (n=926). Tricuspid valve replacement vs. Tricuspid valve repair was evaluated on late mortality (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.03-1.79). Tricuspid valve replacement for functional tricuspid regurgitation was associated with higher early mortality (9% vs 3%) and worse late survival (HR 1.36; 95% CI 1.03-1.79) compared to repair.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: