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.
Reasons and predictors of non-participation in a personalized digital prehabilitation care trial for patients undergoing elective cardiothoracic surgery
Abstract OBJECTIVES Prehabilitation through a digital platform could preoperatively improve the physical and mental fitness of patients undergoing cardiothoracic surgery, thereby improving treatment outcomes. This study aimed to describe the reasons and predictors of non-participation in a personalized digital prehabilitation care trial (Digital Cardiac Counseling randomized controlled trial) for patients undergoing elective cardiothoracic surgery. METHODS Adult patients scheduled for elective cardiothoracic surgery at the Maastricht University Medical Center+ were approached to participate in a digital prehabilitation care trial, in which patients were informed about their care pathway, monitored for symptom progression and screened for preoperative modifiable risk factors. Baseline characteristics of all eligible patients and reasons of non-participation were registered prospectively. Predictors of non-participation were determined using logistic regression. RESULTS Between May 2020 and August 2022, 815 patients were eligible for participation; 421 (52%) did not participate in the personalized digital prehabilitation care trial. Reasons for non-participation were ‘lack of internet access or insufficient digital skills’ (32%), ‘wishing no participation’ (39%) and ‘other reasons’ (30%; e.g. vision or hearing impairments, analphabetism, language barriers). Independent predictors of non-participation were age [odds ratio (OR) 1.024 (1.003–1.046), P = 0.024], socioeconomic status [OR 0.267 (0.133–0.536), P < 0.001], current smoker [OR 1.823 (1.124–2.954), P = 0.015] and EuroSCORE II [OR 1.160 (1.042–1.292), P = 0.007]. CONCLUSIONS Half of the eligible patients did not participate in a personalized digital prehabilitation care trial. Non-participants were vulnerable patients, with a more unfavourable risk profile and more modifiable risk factors, who could potentially benefit the most from prehabilitation.