Literature DB >> 28025464

Tricuspid Valve Replacement vs. Repair in Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation.

Hyoung Woo Chang1, Dong Seop Jeong, Yang Hyun Cho, Kiick Sung, Wook Sung Kim, Young Tak Lee, Pyo Won Park.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare early and late outcomes of tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) and tricuspid valve repair (TVr) for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR).Methods and 
Results: From 1994 to 2012, 360 patients (mean age, 58±13 years) with severe TR underwent TVR (n=97, 27%) or TVr (n=263, 73%). Among them, 282 patients (78%) had initial rheumatic etiology, and 307 patients (85%) had preoperative atrial fibrillation. The TVR group had higher total bilirubin, higher baseline central venous pressure, and higher incidence of previous cardiac operation. There was no difference in early mortality (TVR:TVr, 3.1%:3.4%, P=0.877). Ten-year overall survival (TVR:TVr, 72%:70%, P=0.532) and 10-year freedom from cardiac death (TVR:TVr, 76%:77%, P=0.715) were not significantly different between groups. After applying stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting methods, there were still no significant differences in early mortality (P=0.293), overall survival (P=0.649) or freedom from cardiac death (P=0.870). Higher NYHA functional class, total bilirubin (>2 mg/dL), initial central venous pressure, and cardiopulmonary bypass time were independent predictors of early mortality. Older age, LV dysfunction (EF <40%), and hemoglobin <10 g/dL were independent predictors of late cardiac mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TVr, TVR had acceptable early and late outcomes in patients with severe TR. TVR can be considered as a valid option with acceptable clinical outcomes in patients who are not suitable candidates for TVr.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28025464     DOI: 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-0961

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ J        ISSN: 1346-9843            Impact factor:   2.993


  6 in total

Review 1.  Cardiac surgery 2017 reviewed.

Authors:  Torsten Doenst; Hristo Kirov; Alexandros Moschovas; David Gonzalez-Lopez; Rauf Safarov; Mahmoud Diab; Steffen Bargenda; Gloria Faerber
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 5.460

Review 2.  Mechanics of the Tricuspid Valve-From Clinical Diagnosis/Treatment, In-Vivo and In-Vitro Investigations, to Patient-Specific Biomechanical Modeling.

Authors:  Chung-Hao Lee; Devin W Laurence; Colton J Ross; Katherine E Kramer; Anju R Babu; Emily L Johnson; Ming-Chen Hsu; Ankush Aggarwal; Arshid Mir; Harold M Burkhart; Rheal A Towner; Ryan Baumwart; Yi Wu
Journal:  Bioengineering (Basel)       Date:  2019-05-22

3.  Late Outcomes of Valve Repair Versus Replacement in Isolated and Concomitant Tricuspid Valve Surgery: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

Authors:  Wang-Kin Wong; Shao-Wei Chen; An-Hsun Chou; Hsiu-An Lee; Yu-Ting Cheng; Feng-Chun Tsai; Kuang-Tso Lee; Victor Chien-Chia Wu; Chun-Li Wang; Shang-Hung Chang; Pao-Hsien Chu
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 5.501

4.  Comparative early outcomes of tricuspid Valve repair versus replacement for secondary tricuspid regurgitation.

Authors:  Mohamad Alkhouli; Chalak Berzingi; Amer Kowatli; Fahad Alqahtani; Vinay Badhwar
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2018-09-10

5.  Isolated tricuspid valve surgery; long-term outcomes based on Tehran Heart Center data bank report.

Authors:  Seyed Hosssein Ahmadi Tafti; Farshid Alaeddini; Mahmood Shirzad; Jamshid Bagheri; Abbas Salehi Omran; Mehrdad Mahalleh; Shiva Shoja; Negar Omidi
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 1.637

6.  Reappraisal of mechanical tricuspid valve replacement in the current era: a single center retrospective study.

Authors:  Byungjoon Park; Dong Seop Jeong; Wook Sung Kim; Kiick Sung; Pyo Won Park
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 2.895

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.