Long-Term Outcomes of Bioprosthetic and Mechanical Tricuspid Valve Replacement after Left-Sided Valves Surgery

PURPOSE

This study aimed to show the outcomes of isolated tricuspid valve replacement (ITVR) after left-sided valve surgery (LSVS).

METHODS

Patients who underwent ITVR after LSVS were divided into bioprosthetic tricuspid valve (BTV) and mechanical tricuspid valve (MTV) groups. Clinical data were collected and analyzed between groups.

RESULTS

101 patients were divided into BTV (n = 46) and MTV (n = 55) groups. The mean ages of the BTV and MTV groups were 63.4 ± 8.9 and 52.4 ± 7.6 years, respectively (P <0.01). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (BTV 10.9% vs. MTV 5.5%), early postoperative complications, and long-term tricuspid valve (TV)-related adverse events between these two groups. New-onset renal insufficiency was an independent risk factor for early mortality. Survival rates in the BTV group were 94.8% ± 3.6%, 86.5% ± 6.5%, and 54.2% ± 17.6% and in the MTV group were 96.0% ± 2.8%, 79.0% ± 7.4%, and 59.4% ± 14.8% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively (P = 0.826).

CONCLUSION

The TV prosthesis selection in ITVR after LSVS seems to not affect 30-day mortality and early postoperative complications. Long-term survival and the occurrence of TV-related events were also comparable between these two groups.

Isolated tricuspid valve surgery-Repair versus replacement: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There is a paucity of data on outcomes after isolated tricuspid valve surgery. This meta-analysis aims to compile available data on isolated tricuspid valve surgery and compare isolated tricuspid valve repair (iTVr) with isolated tricuspid valve replacement (iTVR) to elucidate outcomes after tricuspid valve surgery.

METHODS

A literature search of 6 databases was performed. The primary outcomes was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were early stroke, post-op pacemaker placement, and tricuspid reoperation within 5 years. Publication bias was explored using the funnel plot.

RESULTS

Ten retrospective studies involving 1407 patients (iTVr group = 779 patients and iTVR group = 628 patients) were included. A cumulative analysis demonstrated a significant difference favoring iTVr for 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 10 studies [95% confidence interval [CI]]: 0.34 [0.18-0.66]); 4.7% versus 12.6%, for iTVr and iTVR, respectively. Post-op pacemaker placement favored iTVr (OR: 6 studies [95% CI]: 0.37 [0.18-0.77]). Although stroke rates and TV reoperation favored iTVr, they did not reach statistical significance. No publication bias was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrates that iTVr has better 30-day mortality and fewer permanent pacemaker placements. Etiology and severity of TR, as well as careful patient selection remain the most important factors for optimal outcomes.