Back to Authors

Wells, George

0000-0002-2289-9139

Mayo Clinic

Cardiovascular Research Methods Center, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Citations 2

Benefit of isolated surgical valve repair or replacement for functional tricuspid regurgitation and long-term outcomes stratified by the TRI-SCORE

European Heart Journal | August 19, 2024 | Volume: 45 | Issue: 42 | Pages: 4512-4522

10.1093/eurheartj/ehae578 | PMID 39212387

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.
Cost-effectiveness of population screening for aortic stenosis

European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes | May 23, 2024 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 378-387

10.1093/ehjqcco/qcae043 | PMID 38777625

Abstract Aims Aortic stenosis (AS) is a progressive disease predominantly affecting elderly patients that carries significant morbidity and mortality without aortic valve replacement, the only proven treatment. Our objective was to determine the cost-effectiveness of AS screening using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in a geriatric population from the perspective of the publicly funded healthcare system in Canada. Methods and results Markov models estimating the cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for AS screening with a one-time TTE were developed. The model included diagnosed and undiagnosed AS health states, hospitalizations, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), and post-TAVR health states. Primary analysis included screening at 70 and 80 years of age with intervention at symptom onset, with scenario analysis included for early intervention at the time of severe asymptomatic AS diagnosis. Monte Carlo simulation of 5000 replications was completed with a lifetime horizon and a 1.5% discount for costs and outcomes.Screening for AS at the age of 70 years was associated with an ICER of $156 722, and screening at 80 years of age was associated with an ICER of $28 005, suggesting that screening at 80 years of age is cost-effective when willingness-to-pay per QALY is $50 000. Scenario analysis with early intervention was not cost-effective, with an ICER of $142 157 at 70 years and $124 651 at 80 years. Conclusion Screening for AS at 80 years of age with a one-time TTE, in a Canadian population, improves quality of life and is cost-effective in a publicly funded healthcare system providing, TAVR is reserved for symptomatic patients.