Journals / The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology / 2019 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 4

The better substitute for tricuspid valve replacement in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation

Pages
172–176
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, there was no significant difference between mechanical and biological valves with respect toechocardiographic date and survival, reoperation, prosthetic valve dysfunction, and thromboembolism rate.Conclusion: TVR is not a very high-risk procedure in patients with isolated tricuspid regurgitation, and the decision for prosthesis implantationin TVR should be made on an individual basis according to suitable clinical judgment. (Anatol J Cardiol 2019; 22: 172-6)

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The ideal alternative for tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation remains unclear.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of the present study was to retrospectively investigate the outcomes of using bioprosthetic and mechanical valves at the tricuspid position.Methods: A total of 98 consecutive patients without left-side cardiac disease or history of heart surgery who underwent first-time TVR between January 2010 and March 2017 at the West China Hospital, China were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, there was no significant difference between mechanical and biological valves with respect toechocardiographic date and survival, reoperation, prosthetic valve dysfunction, and thromboembolism rate.Conclusion: TVR is not a very high-risk procedure in patients with isolated tricuspid regurgitation, and the decision for prosthesis implantationin TVR should be made on an individual basis according to suitable clinical judgment. (Anatol J Cardiol 2019; 22: 172-6)
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The ideal alternative for tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to retrospectively investigate the outcomes of using bioprosthetic and mechanical valves at the tricuspid position.Methods: A total of 98 consecutive patients without left-side cardiac disease or history of heart surgery who underwent first-time TVR between January 2010 and March 2017 at the West China Hospital, China were included in the study. Patient data, including all-cause death and need for tricuspid valve reoperation as the main end points, were retrospectively evaluated.Results: A total of 76 patients were enrolled into the study. The mean follow-up period was 43.3±21.9 (10–87) months. The mean age of the patients was 45.7±13.4 years. The study comprised 32.9% of male patients. During the follow-up period, 4, 3, 12, and 3 cases of death, reoperation, prosthesis dysfunctions, and prosthesis-related thrombosis were noted, respectively. Biological and mechanical valves were used in 56.6% and 43.4% of the patients, respectively. However, there was no significant difference between mechanical and biological valves with respect toechocardiographic date and survival, reoperation, prosthetic valve dysfunction, and thromboembolism rate.Conclusion: TVR is not a very high-risk procedure in patients with isolated tricuspid regurgitation, and the decision for prosthesis implantationin TVR should be made on an individual basis according to suitable clinical judgment. (Anatol J Cardiol 2019; 22: 172-6)

🔖

Cite This Article

LIANG, W. T., YUE, H., LI, T., QIN, X. L., QIAN, Y. J., WU, Z. (2019). The better substitute for tricuspid valve replacement in patients with severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation. The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 4, 172–176. https://ajindex.com/articles/365706

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Garatti A, Glamberti A, Frigiola A, Menicanti L. The ideal substitute for tricuspid valve replacement in patients with congenital heart disease: an unsolved dilemma. Transl Pediatr 2017; 6: 78-80
  2. Redondo Palacios A, López Menéndez J, Miguelena Hycka J, Martín García M, Varela Barca L, Ferreiro Marzal A, et al. Which type of valve should we use in tricuspid position? Long-term comparison between mechanical and biological valves. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2017; 58: 739-46
  3. Kim JB, Jung SH, Choo SJ, Chung CH, Lee JW. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after surgery for severe isolated tricuspid regurgitation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013; 146: 278-84
  4. Topilsky Y, Khanna AD, Oh JK, Nishimura RA, Enriquez-Sarano M, Jeon YB, et al. Preoperative factors associated with adverse outcome after tricuspid valve replacement. Circulation 2011; 123: 1929-39
  5. Bernal JM, Morales D, Revuelta C, Llorca J, Gutiérrez-Morlote J, Revuelta JM. Reoperations after tricuspid valve repair. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005; 130: 498-503
  6. Iscan ZH, Vural KM, Bahar I, Mavioglu L, Saritas A. What to expect after tricuspid valve replacement? Long-term results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2007; 32: 296-300
  7. Brown ML, Dearani JA, Danielson GK, Cetta F, Connolly HM, Warnes CA, et al. Comparison of the outcome of porcine bioprosthetic versus mechanical prosthetic replacement of the tricuspid valve in the Ebstein anomaly. Am J Cardiol 2009; 103: 555-61
  8. Carrier M, Hébert Y, Pellerin M, Bouchard D, Perrault LP, Cartier R, et al. Tricuspid valve replacement: an analysis of 25 years of experience at a single center. Ann Thorac Surg 2003; 75: 47-50
  9. Mangoni AA, DiSaivo TG, Vlahakes GJ, Polanczyk CA, Fifer MA. Outcome following isolated tricuspid valve replacement. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001; 19: 68-73
  10. Liu P, Qiao WH, Sun FQ, Ruan XL, Al Shirbini M, Hu D, et al. Should a Mechanical or Biological Prosthesis Be Used for a Tricuspid Valve Replacement? A Meta-Analysis. J Card Surg 2016; 31: 294-302
  11. Songur CM, Simsek E, Ozen A, Kocabeyoglu S, Donmez TA. Long term results comparing mechanical and biological prostheses in the tricuspid valve position: which valve types are better--mechanical or biological prostheses? Heart Lung Circ 2014; 23: 1175-8
  12. Filsoufi F, Anyanwu AC, Salzberg SP, Frankel T, Cohn LH, Adams DH. Long-term outcomes of tricuspid valve replacement in the current era. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 80: 845-50
  13. Taramasso M, Gavazzoni M, Pozzoli A, Dre