Bernick, Jordan

ABSTRACT Aims The impact of treatment for tricuspid regurgitation (TR) across different levels of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical and transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions (TTVI) to conservative (medical) management across LVEF categories. Methods and results Patients with severe isolated TR from the TRIGISTRY, a multicentre international registry, were categorized based on LVEF (preserved ejection fraction [pEF]: ≥50%, mildly reduced ejection fraction [mrEF]: 41–49%, and reduced ejection fraction [rEF]: ≤40%). We assessed the impact of treatment modality and procedural success (mild-to-moderate or lower residual TR) on 2-year survival within each LVEF category. Among 2384 patients, 1383 had pEF, 400 had mrEF, and 601 had rEF. Compared to conservative management, surgery (p < 0.0005) and TTVI (p < 0.0001) were associated with a survival benefit in patients with pEF. No significant survival advantage was observed in patients with mrEF (p = 0.28 for both), nor in those with rEF (p = 0.76 and p = 0.22, respectively). Similar results were obtained when surgical and transcatheter interventions were grouped (p < 0.0001, p = 0.17 and p = 0.29 in patients with pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively). Patients with residual TR after TTVI exhibited a trend toward worse survival compared to those managed conservatively across all LVEF categories (p = 0.47, p = 0.33 and p = 0.008 in pEF, mrEF and rEF, respectively). Conclusions Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention, whether surgical or transcatheter-based, was associated with improved survival in patients with pEF but not in those with mrEF or rEF. Residual TR remained a significant prognostic factor across the entire LVEF spectrum. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection when considering TTVI in individuals with rEF.

Abstract Background and Aims Severe tricuspid regurgitation is associated with increased mortality rates, but benefit of its correction and ideal timing are not clearly determined. This study aimed to identify patient subsets who might benefit from the surgery. Methods In TRIGISTRY, an international cohort study of consecutive patients with severe isolated functional tricuspid regurgitation (33 centres, 10 countries), survival rates up to 10 years were compared between patients who underwent isolated tricuspid valve surgery (repair or replacement) and those conservatively managed, overall and according to TRI-SCORE category (low: ≤3, intermediate: 4–5, and high: ≥6). Results One thousand and two hundred seventeen were managed conservatively, and 551 underwent isolated tricuspid valve surgery (200 repairs and 351 replacements). TRI-SCORE distribution was 33% low, 32% intermediate, and 35% high. At 10 years, survival rates were similar between surgical and conservative management [41% vs. 36%; hazard ratio (HR) .97; 95% confidence interval (CI) .88–1.08, P = .57]. Surgery improved survival compared with conservative management in the low TRI-SCORE category (72% vs. 44%; HR .27; 95% CI .20–.37, P < .0001), but not in the intermediate (36% vs. 37%; HR 1.17; 95%CI .98–1.40, P = .09) or high categories (20% vs. 24%; HR 1.06; 95% CI .91–1.25, P = .45). Both repair and replacement improved survival in the low TRI-SCORE category (84% and 61% vs. 44%; HR .11; 95% CI .06–.19, P < .0001, and HR .65; 95% CI .47–.90, P = .009). Repair showed benefit in the intermediate category (59% vs. 37%; HR .49; 95% CI .35–.68, P < .0001) while replacement was possibly harmful (25% vs. 37%; HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.18–1.72, P = .0002). Conclusions Higher survival rates were observed with repair than replacement and benefit of intervention declined as TRI-SCORE increased with no benefit of any type of surgery in the high TRI-SCORE category. These results emphasize the importance of timely intervention and patient selection to achieve the best outcomes and the need for randomized controlled trials.

Introduction There is emerging evidence supporting the use of the radial artery (RA) as a preferred secondary conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) as it is associated with higher rates of graft patency at 5 years when compared with saphenous vein grafts (SVG). The modified Allen’s test (MAT) is traditionally regarded as the standard of care in the assessment of ulnar artery (UA) patency prior to RA harvesting. Unfortunately, due to high false-positive rates, a substantial number of pre-CABG patients are found to have an abnormal MAT despite normal UA patency, resulting in inappropriate exclusion from RA harvesting. The SVG is generally used in its place when this occurs, resulting in potentially lower rates of long-term graft patency. Methods and analysis The CAPITAL iRADIAL-CABG trial is currently enrolling participants 18 years of age or older undergoing CABG for whom the treating physician is considering the use of an RA conduit. Eligible patients will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to MAT or smartphone-based photoplethysmography application assessment to assess collateral palmar circulation prior to RA harvesting. The primary outcome of the trial is the use of the RA as a conduit during CABG. The primary safety outcome is postoperative palmar ischaemia as determined by clinical assessment or requirement of vascular intervention. Secondary outcomes include vascular complications, early graft failure, need for rescue percutaneous coronary intervention during the index hospitalisation and a composite cardiovascular outcome of myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death prior to discharge from hospital. A total of 236 participants are planned to be recruited. Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the Ottawa Heart Science Network Research Ethics Board (approval number 20180865-01H). The study results will be disseminated via conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. Trial registration number NCT03810729.