Five-year outcomes of tricuspid valve repair versus replacement; a propensity score-matched analysis

• Published in: Asian cardiovascular & thoracic annals 2023-06, Vol.31 (5), p.413-420
• Main Authors: Alghamdi, Rawan, Alaloola, Alhnouf A, Aldaghar, Abdulelah S, Alfonso, Juan, Ismail, Huda, Adam, Adam I, Pragliola, Claudio, Albabtain, Monirah A, Arafat, Amr A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 0218-4923; 1816-5370
• DOI: 10.1177/02184923231176508

Background Tricuspid valve repair (TVr) is the recommended approach for managing tricuspid regurgitation; however, there is a concern about the long-term durability of the repair. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of TVr versus tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) in a matched cohort of patients. Methods This study included 1161 patients who underwent tricuspid valve (TV) surgery from 2009 to 2020. Patients were grouped according to the procedure into two groups: patients who underwent TVr (n = 1020) and patients who underwent TVR (n = 159). The propensity score identified 135 matched pairs. Results Renal replacement therapy and bleeding were significantly higher in the TVR group compared to the TVr group both before and after matching. Thirty-day mortality occurred in 38 (3.79%) patients in TVr group versus 3 (1.89%) in the TVR group (P ≤ 0.001) but was not significant after matching. After matching, TV reintervention (hazard ratio (HR): 21.44 (95% CI: 2.17–211.95); P  =  0.009) and heart failure rehospitalization (HR: 1.89 (95% CI: 1.13–3.16); P  =  0.015) were significantly higher in the TVR group. There was no difference in mortality in the matched cohort (HR: 1.63 (95% CI: 0.72–3.70); P  =  0.25). Conclusions TVr was associated with lower renal impairment, reintervention, and heart failure rehospitalization than replacement. TVr remains the preferred approach whenever feasible.