| Literature DB >> 32953764 |
Marcel Santaló-Corcoy1, Lluís Asmarats1, Chi-Hion Li2, Dabit Arzamendi1.
Abstract
Tricuspid regurgitation is a highly prevalent condition, with detrimental effects on long-term survival. However, it has been historically neglected, and only surgically addressed when symptomatic diuretic agents proved insufficient to alleviate congestion. Besides, mortality rates of isolated tricuspid regurgitation surgery have been persistently high, even in contemporary series. This has led to the advent of a myriad of transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions mimicking current surgical technologies, for which a comprehensive imaging work-up holds the key for proper patient selection and intraprocedural monitoring. Although initially designed for compassionate use patients, growing experience and encouraging results of these less-invasive technologies are broadening the spectrum of beneficiaries. In this review, we will focus on the current picture of transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions, with special interest on the current understanding of pathoanatomic tricuspid regurgitation progression, preprocedural multimodality imaging and the latest experience on the different transcatheter devices. 2020 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.Entities:
Keywords: Tricuspid regurgitation (TR); transcatheter therapies
Year: 2020 PMID: 32953764 PMCID: PMC7475403 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.219
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Figure 1Annual trends in surgical volume and mortality for isolated tricuspid valve surgery. As the total amount of both isolated tricuspid valve replacement and repair has risen in from 2004 to 2013, in-hospital mortality has held steady in a median 8.8% ratio. Reproduced with permission from (6).
Figure 2Anatomy of tricuspid valve and surrounding structures. Yellow triangle depicts the triangle of Koch, delineated by the septal leaflet, the tendon of Toaro and the coronary sinus. The star marks the location of the atrioventricular node. Reproduced with permission from (9).
Figure 3Stepwise heart team decision-making for treatment of tricuspid regurgitation. The implementation of a complete patient risk stratification in addition to a comprehensive imaging work-up for the assessment of cardiac pathological remodeling may aid in the accurate heart team to provide appropriate treatment (surgical, minimal invasive surgical, transcatheter, pharmacological, or palliative). Reproduced with permission from (14).
Grading of severity of chronic TR by echography
| Parameters | Grades | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mild | Moderate | Severe | |
| Structural | |||
| TV morphology | Normal or mildly abnormal leaflets+ | Moderately abnormal leaflets | Severe valve lesions+ (e.g., flail leaflet, severe retraction, large perforation) |
| RV and RA size | Usually normal | Normal or mild dilatation | Usually dilated* |
| Inferior vena cava diameter | Normal <2 cm | Normal or mildly dilated 2.1–2.5 cm | Dilated >2.5 cm |
| Qualitative Doppler | |||
| Color flow jet area† | Small, narrow, central+ | Moderate central | Large central jet+ or eccentric wall-impinging jet of variable size |
| Flow convergence zone | Not visible, transient or small+ | Intermediate in size and duration | Large throughout systole+ |
| CWD jet | Faint/partial/parabolic+ | Dense, parabolic or triangular | Dense, often triangular |
| Semiquantitative | |||
| Color flow jet area (cm2)† | Not defined | Not defined | >10+ |
| VCW (cm)† | <0.3 | 0.3-0.69 | ≥0.7+ |
| PISA radius (cm)‡ | ≤0.5 | 0.6-0.9 | >0.9+ |
| Hepatic vein flow§ | Systolic dominance | Systolic blunting | Systolic flow reversal+ |
| Tricuspid flow§ | A-wave dominant+ | Variable | E-wave >1.0 m/sec |
| Quantitative | |||
| EROA (cm2) | <0.20 | 0.2-0.39^ | ≥0.40+ |
| RVol (2D PISA) (mL) | <30+ | 30-44^ | ≥45 |
+, signs are considered specific for their TR grades; *, RV anD RA size can be within the “normal” range in patients with acute severe TR; †, with Nyquist limit >50–70 cm/sec; ‡, with baseline Nyquist limit shift of 28 cm/sec; §, signs are nonspecific and are influences by many other factors (RV diastolic function, atrial fibrillation, RA pressure); ^, there are little data to support further separation of these values. Reproduced with permission from Zoghbi (19). RA, right atrium.
Expansions of the “severe” grade in tricuspid regurgitation
| Variable | Mild | Moderate | Severe | Massive | Torrential |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VC (biplane) | <3 mm | 3–6.9 mm | 7–13 mm | 14–20 mm | ≥21 mm |
| EROA (PISA) | <20 mm2 | 20–39 mm2 | 40–59 mm2 | 60–79 mm2 | ≥80 mm2 |
| 3D VCA or quantitative EROAa | – | – | 75–94 mm2 | 95–114 mm2 | ≥115 mm2 |
a, 3D VCA and quantitative Doppler EROA cut-offs may be larger than PISA EROA. Reproduced with permission from (21). VC, vena contracta; EROA, effective regurgitant orifice área; 3D VCA, three-dimensional vena contracta área.
Imaging needs according to the specific transcatheter tricuspid intervention
| Transcatheter tricuspid intervention | Imaging needs |
|---|---|
| Coaptation | |
| MitraClip PASCAL | Location and width of the largest vena contracta |
| Motion and length of tricuspid leaflets | |
| Coaptation depth and gap | |
| FORMA | Coaptation depth and gap |
| Distance tricuspid annulus to RV apex | |
| Left subclavian vein size | |
| Identify target zone | |
| Tricuspid valve annuloplasty | Dimensions of tricuspid annulus |
| Distance between the RCA and the tricuspid annulus | |
| Orthotopic TMVR | Dimension of tricuspid annulus |
| Distance between the RCA and the tricuspid annulus | |
| Assess leaflet mobility (If pacemaker) | |
| Assess risk of RVOT obstruction | |
| Heterotopic CAVI | Dimensions of caval veins |
| Distance between cavoatrial junction and first hepatic vein | |
| Confirm presence of significant backward caval flow |
RCA, right coronary artery; RVOT, right ventricular outflow tract.
Ongoing trials of transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions
| Device | Study name | Study design | Patients | Primary endpoints |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MitraClip | TRILUMINATE (NCT03227757) | Prospective registry | 85 | Echographic TR reduction ≥1 grade at 30 days |
| Composite of major events at 6 months | ||||
| TRILUMINATE Pivotal Trial (NCT03904147) | Prospective randomized trial | 700 | Number of participants with all-cause mortality, tricuspid valve surgery, heart failure hospitalization, and assessment of KCCQ at 12 months | |
| PASCAL | CLASP TR EFS (NCT03745313) | Prospective registry | 45 | Freedom from device or procedure-related adverse events at 30 days |
| CLASP II TR (NCT04097145) | Prospective randomized trial | 825 | Composite of major events and improvement of quality of life at 24 months | |
| FORMA | Early feasibility study of the Edwards FORMA Tricuspid Transcatheter Repair System (NCT02471807) | Prospective registry | 60 | Device success and freedom from device- or procedure-related serious adverse events at 30 days |
| SPACER (NCT02787408) | Prospective registry | 78 | Cardiac mortality at 30 days, compared to literature-derived performance goal based on surgical outcomes | |
| Trialign | Early feasibility of the Mitralign PTVAS, also known as Trialign (NCT02574650) | Prospective registry | 30 | All-cause mortality at 30 days |
| SCOUT II (NCT03225612) | Prospective registry | 60 | All-cause mortality at 30 days | |
| TriCinch | Clinical Trial Evaluation of the Percutaneous 4Tech TriCinch Coil Tricuspid Valve Repair System (NCT03294200) | Prospective registry | 90 | All-cause mortality of the per protocol cohort at 30 days |
| MIA | STTAR (NCT03692598) | Prospective registry | 40 | Major adverse events and reduction in tricuspid regurgitation at 30 days |
| Cardioband | TRI-REPAIR (NCT02981953) | Prospective registry | 30 | Overall rate of major serious adverse events at 30 days of follow-up |
| Intraprocedural successful access, deployment and positioning of the device | ||||
| Change in septolateral dimension | ||||
| Edwards Cardioband Tricuspid Valve Reconstruction System Early Feasibility Study (NCT03382457) | Prospective registry | 35 | Freedom from device or procedure-related adverse events at 30 days | |
| DaVingi | FiH Study of the DaVingi TR System in the Treatment of Patients with Functional Tricuspid Regurgitation (NCT03700918) | Prospective registry | 15 | Safety in terms of incidence and severity of device-related serious adverse effects |
| Performance of the adjustment device | ||||
| CAVI with Sapien | HOVER (NCT02339974) | Prospective registry | 15 | Procedural success in terms of device success and no device/procedure related SAE at 30 days, and individual success defined by device success and clinical outcomes and functional improvements |
| CAVI with TricValve | TRICUS (NCT03723239) | Prospective registry | 10 | Major adverse events at 30 days and change in NYHA functional class at 6 months |
| Any available device | TriValve (NCT033416166) | Prospective registry | 312 | Cardiovascular death at 30 days |
CAVI, caval valve implantation; KCCQ, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; PTVAS, percutaneous tricuspid valve annuloplasty system; TR, tricuspid regurgitation.
Figure 4Transcatheter tricuspid repair devices. There are several techniques to percutaneously repair tricuspid regurgitation, which can be classified according to its anatomic target. In the illustration, examples of coaptation devices [MitraClip (A), PASCAL (B)], suture annuloplasty [TriAlign (C), TriCinc (D)] and ring annuloplasty [Milipede IRIS (E), Cardioband (F)]. Reproduced with permission from (26).
Figure 5Transcatheter tricusdid replacement devices. Current TTVR prosthesis. (A) Navigate; (B) LUX-Valve; (C) Trisol. Reproduced with permission from (69).
Figure 6Heterotopic caval valve devices. Current prosthesis for heterotopic caval valve implantation: (A) Edwards Sapien 3; (B) TricValve; (C) Tricento. Reproduced with permission from (74).
Global experience with transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions
| Global experience | MitraClip | FORMA | Cardioband | TriAlign | CAVI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Global characteristics | ||||||
| Number of patients | 312 | 249 | 19 | 30 | 15 | 25 |
| Age (years) | 76±8.6 | 77±9 | 76±9 | 75±7 | 73.6±6.6 | 73.9±7.6 |
| Female (%) | 55 | 51.4 | 74.7 | 73 | 86.7 | 52 |
| Euroscore II (%, ± SD or IR) | 9±8 | 6.4 (3.9–13.9) | 9.2±5.6 | 4.1 | N/A | 18.2±12.9 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 78 | 24.9 | 26.3 | N/A | N/A | 32 |
| Atrial fibrillation (%) | 78 | 73.8 | 89.5 | 93 | 66.7 | N/A |
| Right ventricle lead (%) | 22 | 29.7 | 15.8 | 13 | N/A | 36 |
| Previous left-sided valvular surgery (%) | 26.9 | 10.8 | 47.9 | 13 | 66.7 | 76a |
| Cerebrovascular disease (%) | N/A | 41.4 | 11.1 | 17 | 20 | 8 |
| Diabetes (%) | N/A | 29.4 | 10.5 | 27 | 66.7 | 44 |
| NYHA class ≥ III (%) | 95 | 95.6 | 94.7 | 83 | 66.7 | 100 |
| Echocardiography | ||||||
| LVEF (% ± SD) | 49±13 | 49±14 | 60±9 | 58±11 | N/A | 51±15 |
| Functional TR (%) | 93 | 89.6 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 96 |
| Tricuspid annulus (mm ± SD) | 46.9±9 | 47.0±7.6 | 46.1±5.8 | 42.2±0.5 | N/A | 51.0±6.7 |
| TR EROA (cm2 ± SD) | 0.78±0.6 | 0.7±0.53 | 0.92±0.55 | 0.79±0.51 | N/A | N/A |
| TR vena contracta (mm ± SD) | 11±0.5 | 9.9±4.1 | 11.8±4.0 | 12.3±0.45 | N/A | N/A |
| TAPSE (mm ± SD) | 16.2±5 | 15.8±4.3 | 15.3±4.6 | N/A | N/A | 13.0±1.83 |
| Procedural & 30-day outcomes | ||||||
| Successful implantation (%) | 72.8 | 96 | 89.5 | 100 | 100 | 92 |
| Device embolization/dislocation/dehiscence (%) | 0 | 0 | 5.3 | 0 | 20 | 8 |
| Conversion to open heart surgery | 1.4 | 0.4 | 5.3 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Mortality (%) | 3.6 | 2.8 | 0 | 6.7 | 0 | 12 |
| Mid- & long-term follow-up | ||||||
| Follow-up (IR) | 6.2 months (0.4–15.5) | 290 days (141–392) | 32 months ( | 12 months | 12 months | 12 months |
| TR ≥3 (%) | N/A | 27.6 | 66.6 | 34 | N/A | N/A |
| NYHA class ≤ II (%) | 54 | 69.1 | 66.6 | 78 | 90 | N/A |
| Rehospitalization for heart failure (%) | N/A | 20.8 | 17.6 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Mortality (%) | 22.8 at 1.5 years | 20.3 | 23.5 | 16.7 | 6.6 | 63%b |
Comparison of the baseline characteristics, initial and long-term outcomes of the TTVIs, alongside global experience derived from the TriValve registry. Data are gathered from references (27,28,38,49,64,84,85). SD, standard deviation; IR, interquartile range; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; TR, tricuspid regurgitation; EROA, effective regurgitation orifice area; TAPSE, tricuspid annulus plane systolic excursion. aPercentage of global cardiac surgery, not only valvular procedures. bMortality at 12 months available for 22 out of the 25 patients in the population.
Figure 7Algorithm for transcatheter tricuspid valve repair in different stages. CAVI, caval valve implantation; FTR, functional tricuspid regurgitation; PH, pulmonary hypertension; TA, tricuspid annulus; TTVR, transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement. Adapted with permission from (16).