Yogev Peri1, Ben Sadeh1, Chen Sherez1, Aviram Hochstadt1, Simon Biner1, Galit Aviram2, Meirav Ingbir1, Ido Nachmany3, Guy Topaz4, Nir Flint1, Gad Keren1, Yan Topilsky1. 1. Department of Cardiology, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, 6 Weizmann Street, 6423906, Tel Aviv, Israel. 2. Division of Radiology, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Weizmann 6, 6423906, Tel Aviv, Israel. 3. Division of Surgery, Tel Aviv Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Weizmann 6, 6423906, Tel Aviv, Israel. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Meir Hospital, Kfar-Saba and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Weizmann 6, 6423906, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
AIMS: Asses the added value of quantitative evaluation of tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the proper cut-off value for severe TR and 'torrential TR' based on outcome data. The added value of quantitative evaluation of TR, and the cut-off values associated with increased mortality are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In patients with all-cause TR assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively by proximal iso-velocity surface area method, long-term and 1-year outcome analysis was conducted. Thresholds for excess mortality were assessed using spline curves, receiver-operating characteristic curves, and minimum P-value analysis. The study involved 676 patients with all-cause TR (age 73.9 ± 14 years, male 45%, ejection fraction 52.9 ± 14%). Effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) was strongly associated with decreased survival in unadjusted [hazard ratio (HR) 2.38 (1.79-3.01), P < 0.0001 per 0.1 cm2 increment] and adjusted [2.6 (1.25-5.0), P = 0.01] analyses. Quantitative grading was superior to qualitative grading in prediction of outcome (P < 0.01). The optimal cut-off value for the best separation in survival between groups of patients with severe vs. lesser degree of TR was 0.35 cm2 [P < 0.0001, HR =2.0 (1.5-2.7)]. ERO negatively impacted survival, even when including only the subgroup of patients with severe TR [HR 1.5 (1.01-2.3); P = 0.04]. The optimal threshold corresponding for the best separation for survival between groups of patients with severe vs. 'torrential' TR was 0.7 cm2 [P = 0.005, HR =2.6 (1.2-5.1)]. CONCLUSION: TR can be severe and even 'torrential' and is associated with excess mortality. Quantitative assessment of TR by ERO measurement is a powerful independent predictor of outcome, superior to standard qualitative assessment. The optimal cut-off above which mortality is increased is 0.35 cm2, similar albeit slightly lower than suggested in recent guidelines. Torrential TR >0.7 cm2 is associated with poorer survival compared to patients with severe TR (ERO > 0.4 cm2 and <0.7 cm2). Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Asses the added value of quantitative evaluation of tricuspid regurgitation (TR), the proper cut-off value for severe TR and 'torrential TR' based on outcome data. The added value of quantitative evaluation of TR, and the cut-off values associated with increased mortality are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In patients with all-cause TR assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively by proximal iso-velocity surface area method, long-term and 1-year outcome analysis was conducted. Thresholds for excess mortality were assessed using spline curves, receiver-operating characteristic curves, and minimum P-value analysis. The study involved 676 patients with all-cause TR (age 73.9 ± 14 years, male 45%, ejection fraction 52.9 ± 14%). Effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) was strongly associated with decreased survival in unadjusted [hazard ratio (HR) 2.38 (1.79-3.01), P < 0.0001 per 0.1 cm2 increment] and adjusted [2.6 (1.25-5.0), P = 0.01] analyses. Quantitative grading was superior to qualitative grading in prediction of outcome (P < 0.01). The optimal cut-off value for the best separation in survival between groups of patients with severe vs. lesser degree of TR was 0.35 cm2 [P < 0.0001, HR =2.0 (1.5-2.7)]. ERO negatively impacted survival, even when including only the subgroup of patients with severe TR [HR 1.5 (1.01-2.3); P = 0.04]. The optimal threshold corresponding for the best separation for survival between groups of patients with severe vs. 'torrential' TR was 0.7 cm2 [P = 0.005, HR =2.6 (1.2-5.1)]. CONCLUSION:TR can be severe and even 'torrential' and is associated with excess mortality. Quantitative assessment of TR by ERO measurement is a powerful independent predictor of outcome, superior to standard qualitative assessment. The optimal cut-off above which mortality is increased is 0.35 cm2, similar albeit slightly lower than suggested in recent guidelines. Torrential TR >0.7 cm2 is associated with poorer survival compared to patients with severe TR (ERO > 0.4 cm2 and <0.7 cm2). Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Jacqueline T DesJardin; Joanna Chikwe; Rebecca T Hahn; Judy W Hung; Francesca N Delling Journal: Circ Res Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: Mirjam G Winkel; Nicolas Brugger; Omar K Khalique; Christoph Gräni; Adrian Huber; Thomas Pilgrim; Michael Billinger; Stephan Windecker; Rebecca T Hahn; Fabien Praz Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2020-05-05
Authors: Akram Kawsara; Fahad Alqahtani; Vuyisile T Nkomo; Mackram F Eleid; Sorin V Pislaru; Charanjit S Rihal; Rick A Nishimura; Hartzell V Schaff; Juan A Crestanello; Mohamad Alkhouli Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 5.501