Impact of tricuspid regurgitation severity and repair on aortic valve replacement

Improved tricuspid regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement is associated with better survival: Systematic review and meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis compared survival outcomes among patients experiencing improvement in untreated significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe aortic stenosis, in contrast to those without improvement.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through January 2024. Pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. Employing network meta-analysis, a comparison involving four post-procedural TR categories (improved, no improvement, worsened, and no change) was executed. Subsequently, these categories were amalgamated into two groups (less TR after TAVR and same or greater TR after TAVR), and a standard meta-analysis was conducted. Kaplan-Meier curves depicting long-term all-cause mortality were reconstructed utilizing individual patient data derived from the studies.

RESULTS

A systematic review identified seven non-randomized studies encapsulating 698 patients. Network meta-analysis revealed that improved TR after TAVR correlated with significantly lower long-term all-cause mortality compared to the remaining cohorts. Similarly, pooled all-cause mortality of standard meta-analysis demonstrated significant reduction in patients whose TR was sub-baseline than those exhibiting same or greater TR after TAVR (HR [95% CI] = 0.43 [0.32-0.58], p < .01). The hazard ratio, derived from reconstructed time-to-event data, showed a lower long-term all-cause mortality in patients with less TR after TAVR relative to the other cohort (HR [95% CI] = 0.46 [0.32-0.67], p < .01).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis revealed that improved TR after TAVR correlates with superior long-term survival. The benefits of simultaneous or staged intervention on the tricuspid valve in individuals undergoing TAVR warrant validation in future investigations.

Progression of Non-Significant Mitral and Tricuspid Regurgitation after Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Regurgitation

Little is known about the natural history of non-significant mitral and tricuspid regurgitation (MR and TR) following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for aortic regurgitation (AR). We retrospectively analyzed 184 patients (median age 64 (IQR, 55-74) years, 76.6% males) who underwent SAVR for AR. Subjects with significant non-aortic valvulopathies, prior/concomitant valvular interventions, or congenital heart disease were excluded. The cohort was evaluated for MR/TR progression and, based on the latter's occurrence, for echocardiographic and clinical indices of heart failure and mortality. By 5.8 (IQR, 2.8-11.0) years post-intervention, moderate or severe MR occurred in 20 (10.9%) patients, moderate or severe TR in 25 (13.5%), and either of the two in 36 (19.6%). Patients who developed moderate or severe MR/TR displayed greater biventricular disfunction and functional limitation and were less likely to be alive at 7.0 (IQR, 3.4-12.1) years compared to those who did not (47.2 vs. 79.7%, p < 0.001). The emergence of significant MR/TR was associated with preoperative atrial fibrillation/flutter, symptomatic heart failure, and above-mild MR/TR as well as concomitant composite graft use, but not with baseline echocardiographic measures of biventricular function and dimensions, aortic valve morphology, or procedural aspects. In conclusion, among patients undergoing SAVR for AR, significant MR/TR developed in one fifth by six years, correlated with more adverse course, and was anticipated by baseline clinical and echocardiographic variables.

Commentary: Progression of Tricuspid Regurgitation Following Aortic Valve Replacement: Risk Factors, Considerations, and Debates on Prophylactic Repair

See Article page 304.

Cardiac Surgery 2021 Reviewed

PubMed displayed more than 35,000 hits for the search term "cardiac surgery AND 2021." We used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) approach and selected relevant publications for a results-oriented summary. As in recent years, we reviewed the fields of coronary and conventional valve surgery and their overlap with their interventional alternatives. COVID reduced cardiac surgical activity around the world. In the coronary field, the FAME 3 trial dominated publications by practically repeating SYNTAX, but with modern stents and fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). PCI was again unable to achieve non-inferiority compared with coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in patients with triple-vessel disease. Survival advantages of CABG over PCI could be linked to a reduction in myocardial infarctions and current terminology was criticized because the term "myocardial revascularization" is not precise and does not reflect the infarct-preventing collateralization effect of CABG. In structural heart disease, new guidelines were published, providing upgrades of interventional treatments of both aortic and mitral valve disease. While for aortic stenosis, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) received a primary recommendation in older and high-risk patients; recommendations for transcatheter mitral edge-to-edge treatment were upgraded for patients considered inappropriate for surgery. For heart team discussions it is important to know that classic aortic valve replacement currently provides strong signals (from registry and randomized evidence) for a survival advantage over TAVI after 5 years. This article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It can neither be complete nor free of individual interpretation, but provides up-to-date information for decision-making and patient information.