Concomitant tricuspid valve surgery in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study aims to investigate the effect of concomitant tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) during left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation due to the controversy over the clinical outcomes of concomitant TVS in patients undergoing LVAD.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and EMbase from the inception to 1 August 2023. Studies comparing outcomes in adult patients undergoing concomitant TVS during LVAD implantation (TVS group) and those who did not (no-TVS group) were included. The primary outcomes were right heart failure (RHF), right ventricular assist device (RVAD) implantation, and early mortality. All meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models, and a two-tailed P <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included, and 16 of them were involved in the meta-analysis, with 660 patients in the TVS group and 1291 in the no-TVS group. Patients in the TVS group suffered from increased risks of RHF [risk ratios (RR)=1.31, 95% CI: 1.01-1.70, P =0.04; I2 =38%, pH =0.13), RVAD implantation (RR=1.56, 95% CI: 1.16-2.11, P =0.003; I2 =0%, pH =0.74), and early mortality (RR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.07-2.42, P =0.02; I2 =0%, pH =0.75). Besides, the increased risk of RHF holds true in patients with moderate to severe tricuspid regurgitation (RR=1.36, 95% CI: 1.04-1.78, P =0.02). TVS was associated with a prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time. No significant differences in acute kidney injury, reoperation requirement, hospital length of stay, or ICU stay were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant TVS failed to show benefits in patients undergoing LVAD, and it was associated with increased risks of RHF, RVAD implantation, and early mortality.

Durability of Tricuspid Valve Repair in Patients Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

Objectives: Benefits of tricuspid valve repair (TVR) in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients have been questioned. High TVR failure rates have been reported. Remaining or recurring TR was found to be a risk factor for right heart failure (RHF). Therefore, we assessed our experience. Methods: Since 12/2010, 195 patients have undergone LVAD implantation in our center. Almost half (n = 94, 48%) received concomitant TVR (LVAD+TVR). These patients were included in our analysis. Echocardiographic and clinical data were assessed. Median follow-up was 2.8 years (7 days-0.6 years). Results were correlated with clinical outcomes. Results: LVAD+TVR patients were 59.8 ± 11.4 years old (89.4% male) and 37.3% were INTERMACS level 1 and 2. Preoperative TR was moderate in 28 and severe in 66 patients. RV function was severely impaired in 61 patients reflected by TAPSE-values of 11.2 ± 2.9 mm (vs. 15.7 ± 3.8 mm in n = 33; p < 0.001). Risk for RHF according to EUROMACS-RHF risk score was high (>4 points) in 60 patients, intermediate (>2-4 points) in 19 and low (0-2 points) in 15. RHF occurred in four patients (4.3%). Mean duration of echocardiographic follow-up was 2.8 ± 2.3 years. None of the patients presented with severe and only five (5.3%) with moderate TR. The vast majority (n = 63) had mild TR, and 26 patients had no/trace TR. Survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 77.4%, 68.1% and 55.6%, 30-day mortality was 11.7% (n = 11). Heart transplantation was performed in 12 patients (12.8%). Conclusions: Contrary to expectations, concomitant TVR during LVAD implantation may result in excellent repair durability, which appears to be associated with low risk for RHF.

Does concomitant tricuspid valve intervention at the time of left ventricular assist device placement for patients with significant tricuspid regurgitation lead to improved outcomes compared to isolated left ventricular assist device placement?

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'In patients with advanced heart failure (HF) and moderate to severe functional tricuspid regurgitation (TR) undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) placement is concomitant tricuspid valve intervention (TVI) superior for the clinical outcomes of survival, right ventricular failure, rehospitalizations for HF, functional status, and quality of life?' Altogether, 56 papers were found using the reported search, of which 12 papers represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date, country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Our search found no significant clinical benefit for concomitant TVI at the time of LVAD placement. We conclude that patient with moderate-to-severe TR should not routinely undergo concomitant TVI with LVAD placement.

Less is better? Comparing effects of median sternotomy and thoracotomy surgical approaches for left ventricular assist device implantation on postoperative outcomes and valvulopathy

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare outcomes after left ventricular assist device implantation performed via median sternotomy or lateral thoracotomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 222 adult patients with the HeartMate3 (Abbott Lab) left ventricular assist device implanted between November 2014 and November 2021. Outcomes stratified by surgical approach were evaluated in propensity score-matched groups. The primary outcome was 1-year survival. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital morbidity and mortality, readmissions, and significant valvular regurgitation.

RESULTS

Our cohort consisted of 60 patients (27%) who underwent lateral thoracotomy and 162 patients (73%) who underwent median sternotomy. Propensity score matching compared 45 patients who underwent lateral thoracotomy with 68 patients who underwent median sternotomy. There were no differences in intensive care unit or hospital stay duration (median, 10 vs 11 days, P = .58; 46 vs 40 days, P = .279), time to extubation (median, 2 days, P = .627), vasoactive-inotropic scores at intensive care unit arrival (18.20 vs 16.60, P = .654), or in-hospital mortality (2 [5%] vs 4 [6.1%] patients, P = 1). One-year survival (95.56% vs 90.61%, P = .48) and all-cause hospital readmission rate (Gray's test: P = .532) were also comparable. Patients who underwent lateral thoracotomy had significantly less early right ventricular failure (24.4% vs 53.7%, P = .004), although they had more follow-up tricuspid regurgitation (17.6% vs 0%, P = .030) and volume overload readmissions (Gray's test: P = .0005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that lateral thoracotomy is a safe although not necessarily superior alternative to median sternotomy for HeartMate 3 implantation in the perioperative and postoperative periods, because it precludes concomitant tricuspid valve repairs and may be associated with increased risk of late tricuspid regurgitation and volume overload readmissions.

Perioperative Right Ventricular Dysfunction and Abnormalities of the Tricuspid Valve Apparatus in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery

Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction frequently occurs after cardiac surgery and is linked to adverse postoperative outcomes, including mortality, reintubation, stroke, and prolonged ICU stays. While various criteria using echocardiography and hemodynamic parameters have been proposed, a consensus remains elusive. Distinctive RV anatomical features include its thin wall, which presents a triangular shape in a lateral view and a crescent shape in a cross-sectional view. Principal causes of RV dysfunction after cardiac surgery encompass ischemic reperfusion injury, prolonged ischemic time, choice of cardioplegia and its administration, cardiopulmonary bypass weaning characteristics, and preoperative risk factors. Post-left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation RV dysfunction is common but often transient, with a favorable prognosis upon resolution. There is an ongoing debate regarding the benefits of concomitant surgical repair of the RV in the presence of regurgitation. According to the literature, the gold standard techniques for assessing RV function are cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and hemodynamic assessment using thermodilution. Echocardiography is widely favored for perioperative RV function evaluation due to its accessibility, reproducibility, non-invasiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Although other techniques exist for RV function assessment, they are less common in clinical practice. Clinical management strategies focus on early detection and include intravenous drugs (inotropes and vasodilators), inhalation drugs (pulmonary vasodilators), ventilator strategies, volume management, and mechanical support. Bridging research gaps in this field is crucial to improving clinical outcomes associated with RV dysfunction in the near future.

Late Right Heart Failure After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation: Contemporary Insights and Future Perspectives

Late right heart failure (RHF) is increasingly recognized in patients with long-term left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support and is associated with decreased survival and increased incidence of adverse events such as gastrointestinal bleeding and stroke. Progression of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction to clinical syndrome of late RHF in patients supported with LVAD is dependent on the severity of pre-existing RV dysfunction, persistent or worsening left- or right-sided valvular heart disease, pulmonary hypertension, inadequate or excessive left ventricular unloading, and/or progression of the underlying cardiac disease. RHF likely represents a continuum of risk with early presentation and progression to late RHF. However, de novo RHF develops in a subset of patients leading to increased diuretic requirement, arrhythmias, renal and hepatic dysfunction, and heart failure hospitalizations. The distinction between isolated late RHF and RHF due to left-sided contributions is lacking in registry studies and should be the focus of future registry data collection. Potential management strategies include optimization of RV preload and afterload, neurohormonal blockade, LVAD speed optimization, and treatment of concomitant valvular disease. In this review, the authors discuss definition, pathophysiology, prevention, and management of late RHF.

Managing valvular pathology during LVAD implantation

Since the time of their invention, implantable continuous flow left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) have improved the quality of life and extended survival for patients with advanced heart failure. The decision surgeons and their physician colleagues make with these patients to undergo implantation must come with full understanding of the immediate, short-term, and long-term implications of such a life-changing procedure. The presence of pathology regarding the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid valves introduces particularly complex problems for the surgical treatment strategy. Concomitant valve repair or replacement increases cardiopulmonary bypass and cross clamp times, and could potentially lead to worse outcomes in the perioperative setting. Following perioperative recovery, valvular pathology may worsen or arise de novo given the often drastic immediate physiologic changes in blood flow, septal function, and, over time, ventricular remodeling. Over the past two decades, there has been vast improvement in the device manufacturing, surgical techniques, and medical management surrounding LVAD implantation. Yet, addressing concomitant valvular pathology remains a complex question with no perfect solutions. This review aims to briefly describe the evolution of approach to valvular pathology in the LVAD patient and offer our opinion and treatment rationale.

Tricuspid regurgitation in the setting of LVAD support

Tricuspid valve regurgitation (TR) is a common complication of end-stage heart failure. Increased pulmonary venous pressures caused by left ventricular (LV) dysfunction can result in a progressive dilation of the right ventricle and tricuspid valve annulus, resulting in functional TR. Here, we review what is known about TR in the setting of severe LV dysfunction necessitating long-term mechanical support with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), including the occurrence of significant TR, its pathophysiology, and natural history. We examine the impact of uncorrected TR on LVAD outcomes and the impact of tricuspid valve interventions at the time of LVAD placement, revealing that TR frequently improves after LVAD placement with or without concomitant tricuspid valve intervention such that the benefit of concomitant intervention remains controversial. We summarize the current evidence on which to base medical decisions and provide recommendations for future directions of study to address outstanding questions in the field.

Tricuspid surgery at the time of LVAD implant: A critique

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a common finding in patients with end stage heart failure referred for implantation of left ventricular assist devices. While functional TR frequently resolves after left ventricular unloading, patients with residual and progressive TR demonstrate increased rates of RV dysfunction and poor survival. Criteria for intervention on the tricuspid valve have focused on the degree of tricuspid annular dilatation and the severity of tricuspid regurgitant volume. The surgical decision making regarding intervention on the tricuspid valve remains obscure and historical cohort data cannot distinguish cause from effect.

Tricuspid Valve Surgery in Patients Receiving Left Ventricular Assist Devices

BACKGROUND

 Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is common and related to poor prognosis in patients after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. The concomitant tricuspid valve surgery (TVS) at the time of LVAD implantation on short and long-term outcomes are controversial in current evidence.

METHODS

 This is a single-center, observational, retrospective study. We enrolled patients with moderate-to-severe TR who received LVAD implantations from 2009 to 2020. Postoperative right ventricular failure (RVF), right ventricular assist device (RVAD) use, hospital mortality, new-onset renal replacement therapy (RRT), and acute kidney injury (AKI) were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

 Sixty-eight patients were included, 36 with and 32 without concomitant TVS. Baseline characteristics did not differ between the two groups. Patients receiving TVS had significantly increased incidences of postoperative RVF (52.8 vs. 25.0%, p = 0.019), RVAD implantation (41.7 vs. 18.8%, p = 0.041), and new-onset RRT (22.2 vs. 0%, p = 0.004). No difference in the incidence of AKI and hospital mortality was detected. Besides, these associations remained consistent in patients who underwent LVAD implantation via median sternotomy. During a median follow-up of 2.76 years, Kaplan-Meier analysis and competing-risk analysis showed that TVS was not associated with better overall survival in patients after LVAD implantation compared with the no-TVS group.

CONCLUSION

 Our study suggests that concomitant TVS failed to show benefits in patients receiving LVAD implantation. Even worse, concomitant TVS is associated with significantly increased incidences of RVF, RVAD use, and new-onset of RRT. Considering the small sample size and short follow-up, these findings warrant further study.

Physiology of Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Device Therapy

The expanding use of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) for end-stage heart failure warrants familiarity with the physiologic interaction of the device with the native circulation. Contemporary devices utilize predominantly centrifugal flow and, to a lesser extent, axial flow rotors that vary with respect to their intrinsic flow characteristics. Flow can be manipulated with adjustments to preload and afterload as in the native heart, and ascertainment of the predicted effects is provided by differential pressure-flow (H-Q) curves or loops. Valvular heart disease, especially aortic regurgitation, may significantly affect adequacy of mechanical support. In contrast, atrioventricular and ventriculoventricular timing is of less certain significance. Although beneficial effects of device therapy are typically seen due to enhanced distal perfusion, unloading of the left ventricle and atrium, and amelioration of secondary pulmonary hypertension, negative effects of CF-LVAD therapy on right ventricular filling and function, through right-sided loading and septal interaction, can make optimization challenging. Additionally, a lack of pulsatile energy provided by CF-LVAD therapy has physiologic consequences for end-organ function and may be responsible for a series of adverse effects. Rheological effects of intravascular pumps, especially shear stress exposure, result in platelet activation and hemolysis, which may result in both thrombotic and hemorrhagic consequences. Development of novel solutions for untoward device-circulatory interactions will facilitate hemodynamic support while mitigating adverse events. © 2021 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 12:1-37, 2021.

Impact of concomitant cardiac valvular surgery during implantation of continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices: A European registry for patients with mechanical circulatory support (EUROMACS) analysis

BACKGROUND

We investigated the clinical outcomes after cardiac valvular surgery procedures concomitant (CCPs) with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation compared to propensity score (PS) matched controls using the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS) data.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2018, 2760 continuous-flow LVAD patients were identified. Of these, 533 underwent a CCP during the LVAD implant.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass time (p < 0.001) and time for implant (p < 0.001) were both significantly longer in the LVAD+CCP group. Hospital mortality was comparable between the two groups from the unmatched population (15.7% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.073). Similarly, short-to-mid-term survival was similar in both groups, with 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of 67.9%, 48.2%, and 27.7% versus 66.4%, 46.1%, and 26%, respectively (log-rank, p = 0.25). The results were similar in the PS-matched population. Hospital mortality was comparable between the two groups (18.9% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.074). The short-to-mid-term Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was similar for both groups, with 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of 63.4%, 49.2%, and 24.7% versus 66.5%, 46%, and 25.1%, respectively (log-rank, p = 0.81). In the unmatched population, LVAD+CCP patients had longer intensive care unit (ICU) stays (p < 0.0001), longer mechanical ventilation time (p = 0.001), a higher rate of temporary right ventricular assist device (RVAD) support (p = 0.033), and a higher rate of renal replacement therapy (n = 35, 6.6% vs. n = 89, 4.0%, p = 0.014). In the PS-matched population, the LVAD+CCP patients had longer ICU stays (p = 0.019) and longer mechanical ventilation time (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of additive valvular procedures (CCPs) does not seem to affect short-term survival, significantly, based on our registry data analysis. However, the decision to perform CCPs should be balanced with the projected type of surgery and preoperative characteristics. LVAD+CCP patients remain a delicate population and adverse device-related events should be strictly monitored and managed.

Results after Repair of Functional Tricuspid Regurgitation with a Three-Dimensional Annuloplasty Ring

Background: Tricuspid valve (TV) repair is the recommended treatment for severe functional tricuspid regurgitation (fTR) in patients undergoing left-sided surgery. For this purpose, a wide range of annuloplasty devices differing in form and flexibility are available. This study reports the results using a three-dimensional annuloplasty ring (Medtronic, Contour 3D Ring) for TV repair and analysis of risk factors. Methods: A cohort of 468 patients who underwent TV repair (TVr) with a concomitant cardiac procedure from December 2010 to January 2017 was retrospectively analyzed. Results: At follow-up, 96.1% of patients had no/trivial or mild TR. The 30-day mortality was 4.7%; it significantly differed between electively performed operations (2.7%) and urgent/emergent operations (11.7%). Risk factors for recurrent moderate and severe TR were LVEF < 50%, TAPSE < 16 mm, and moderate mitral valve (MV) regurgitation at follow-up. Preoperatively reduced renal function lead to a higher 30-day and overall mortality. Reoperation of the TV was required in six patients (1.6%). Risk factors for TV related reoperations were preoperative TV annulus over 50 mm and an implanted permanent pacemaker. Conclusions: TVr with the Contour 3D annuloplasty ring shows low TR recurrence and reoperation rates. Risk-factor analysis for the recurrence of TR revealed the importance of left- and right-ventricular function.

Development of tricuspid regurgitation and right ventricular performance after implantation of centrifugal left ventricular assist devices

Background

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation is associated with a poor prognosis. This study evaluates the development of TR and right ventricular (RV) performance after LVAD implantation.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LVAD implantation between March 2018 and June 2019. Patients who underwent concomitant tricuspid valve surgery and patients with congenital heart disease were excluded.

Results

A total of 155 patients underwent LVAD implantation. Fourteen patients were excluded. Of the remaining patients, thirty-one died during the first six months, six were lost to follow-up and two underwent transplantation. 102 patients presented at 6.3 months (5.8 to 7.0). Patients were supported with HeartWare HVAD (74%) or HeartMate 3 (26%). 50.4% were rated as INTERMACS profile 1 or 2. At six months, systolic pulmonary artery pressure dropped from 36 to 21 mmHg (P<0.001). Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion decreased from 17.3 to 14.3 mm (P<0.001), RV fractional area change did not change (P=0.839). Twenty-two patients (22%) presented with moderate-to-severe or severe (ms-s) TR pre-operatively. Of these, eighteen (81%) showed improvement to ≤ moderate TR. At follow-up twelve patients presented with ms-s TR. Of these, only four patients (33%) had been diagnosed with ms-s TR pre-operatively. There were no differences in pre-operative echocardiographic or clinical parameters between the twelve patients with ms-s late TR and the other ninety patients in the cohort.

Conclusions

TR can show an impressive improvement with LVAD support. Longitudinal RV function decreases; this appears to be compensated by transverse shortening. Late TR can develop independently from pre-operative parameters including TR.

Concomitant cardiac surgery procedures during left ventricular assist device implantation: single-centre experience

Background

Additional cardiac pathologies including tricuspid or mitral valve regurgitation are common in left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients and whether to address them remains controversial. We present our institutional outcomes of concomitant cardiac procedures, other than temporary right ventricular (RV) support, at the time of LVAD implantation.

Methods

From 03/2006 to 06/2020, 352 adult patients {median age 60 [interquartile range (IQR): 52-66] years; INTERMACS level 1 29%; INTERMACS level 2 17%; INTERMACS level 3 23%, INTERMACS level 4-6 31%; male 86%} underwent continuous-flow LVAD [Medtronic HVAD^® (HVAD) 50%; Abbott HeartMate II^TM (HMII) 17%; Abbott HeartMate 3^TM (HM3) 33%] implantation. Concomitant valvular procedures were performed in 86 patients (24%) and the majority of patients received the LVAD as bridge to candidacy (BTC) for transplant (74%). Primary study endpoints were short- and mid-term mortality, as well as need for temporary RV support.

Results

Tricuspid valve annuloplasty was the most frequent concomitant procedure (77%), followed by aortic valve replacements (AVRs) or Park's stitch (33%). Temporary RV support was common in the study cohort (35%) using either extracorporeal life support (ECLS, 37%) or a temporary RV assist device (RVAD, 63%). A less invasive (LIS) implantation technique was pursued in 12%. Thirty-day mortality was comparable between those with and without concomitant surgery (4% vs. 6%, P=0.426). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for additional interventions (22% vs. 14%, P=0.05), whereas one-year survival was similar (71% vs. 79%, P=0.106).

Conclusions

Concomitant cardiac procedures, especially tricuspid and aortic valve surgery, are frequent but are associated with a higher perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Impact of tricuspid valve insufficiency on the performance of left ventricular assist devices

Objective

To evaluate the impact of severe tricuspid valve insufficiency (TVI) at the time of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation on the hemodynamic and LVAD parameters in an acute ovine model.

Methods

Stable heart failure (HF) was induced in 10 ovines through the application of 3 ± 1 coronary ligations. Once stable HF was obtained (after 15 ± 5 days), the animals were supported with an LVAD. Hemodynamic data and pump parameters were obtained and compared in 2 settings; first with LVAD in place after weaning from the cardiopulmonary bypass machine (no TVI condition) and second following the induction of severe TVI through resection of the tricuspid valve (TVI condition).

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in the hemodynamic and pump parameters between TVI condition and no TVI conditions except for lower cardiac output in the TVI condition (2 [1.38-2.8] L/min vs 3.2 [1.55-3.7] L/min, P = .027) and the expected greater central venous pressure in the TVI condition (26 [24-31] mm Hg vs 15 [13-25] mm Hg, P = .020). A median pump flow of 2.8 (2.45-3.75) L/min versus 2.9 (2.75-3.8) L/min in the TVI condition and no TVI condition was documented (P = .160).

Conclusions

Results from this acute animal study suggest that severe TVI in HF with preserved right ventricular function does not have significant impact on the LVAD pump parameters. The observed reduction in cardiac output may warrant further investigations, especially under loading conditions.

In-Hospital Outcomes of Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation and Concomitant Valvular Surgery

Valvular heart disease is common among left ventricular assist device (LVAD) recipients. However, its management at the time of LVAD implantation remains controversial. Patients who underwent LVAD implantation and concomitant aortic (AVR), mitral (MVR), or tricuspid valve (TVR) repair or replacement from 2010 to 2017 were identified using the national inpatient sample. End points were in-hospital outcomes, length of stay, and cost. Procedure-related complications were identified via ICD-9 and ICD-10 coding and analysis was performed via mixed effect models. A total of 25,171 weighted adults underwent LVAD implantation without valvular surgery, 1,329 had isolated TVR, 1,021 AVR, 377 MVR, and 615 had combined valvular surgery (411 had TVR + AVR, 115 TVR + MVR, 62 AVR + MVR, 25 AVR + MVR + TVR). During the study period, rates of AVR decreased and combined valvular surgeries increased. Patients who underwent TVR or combined valvular surgery had overall higher burden of co-morbidities than LVAD recipients with or without other valvular procedures. Postoperative bleeding was higher with AVR whereas acute kidney injury requiring dialysis was higher with TVR or combined valvular surgery. In-hospital mortality was higher with AVR, MVR, or combined surgery without differences in the rates of stroke. Length of stay did not differ significantly among groups but cost of hospitalization and nonroutine discharge rates were higher for cases of TVR and combined surgery. Approximately 1 in 9 LVAD recipients underwent concomitant valvular surgery and TVR was the most frequently performed procedure. In-hospital mortality and cost were lower among those who did not undergo valvular surgery.

Tricuspid Regurgitation in Congestive Heart Failure: Management Strategies and Analysis of Outcomes

Tricuspid regurgitation is a notable aspect of congestive heart failure and is linked with worse outcomes if untreated. Functional tricuspid regurgitation commonly is seen in patients with heart failure, particularly in patients presenting for surgical management, such as those for mechanical cardiac assist device implantation. This review aims to study the published data related to the surgical management of tricuspid regurgitation in the cardiac surgical population comprehensively.

Clinical impact of concomitant tricuspid valve procedures during left ventricular assist device implantation

BACKGROUND

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is common in patients with end-stage heart failure receiving left ventricular assist devices (LVADs), but the benefit of concomitant tricuspid valve procedures (TVPs) remains uncertain. This study examined the impact of TVP at the time of LVAD implantation on clinical outcomes and quality of life (QOL) metrics.

METHODS

We included adult patients in the Interagency Registry for Mechanical Circulatory Support database with various degrees of TR who received continuous-flow LVADs from 2008 to 2017. Patients undergoing concomitant TVP were compared with those without the intervention in a stratified analysis. Descriptive analyses, survival analyses, and Andersen‒Gill hazard models were used as appropriate to examine associations with clinical and patient-centered QOL outcomes.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 8,263 (53.1%) mild, 4,252 (33.3%) moderate, and 2,100 (13.5%) severe TR cases. TVP rate increased with severity: 8.6% of mild, 18.0% of moderate, and 43.9% of severe cases. TVP was not associated with survival benefit in cases of mild (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.79-1.19, p = 0.75), moderate (aHR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.88-1.20, p = 0.72), or severe (aHR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.98-1.48, p = 0.08) TR. For patients with combined moderate or severe TR, TVP was associated with increased mortality (log-rank p < 0.01, aHR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.00-1.27, p = 0.04). After adjusting for TR severity, TVP was associated with increased risk of bleeding, arrhythmia, and stroke (p < 0.01 each) and no improvements in QOL (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

TVP at the time of LVAD implantation was not associated with either improved survival or QOL, and there were associations with increased risk of adverse events among patients with moderate and severe TR.