ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2023
Echocardiographic parameters recommended for assessing the severity of tricuspid regurgitation: concordance and discordance.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Re: Clinical characteristics and outcomes of isolated severe functional tricuspid regurgitation in a real-world setting.Heart and vessels · 2026Article
- Deep learning for atrioventricular regurgitation diagnosis: an external validation study.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Four-dimensional automated quantitative echocardiography assessment of right heart remodeling in patients with functional tricuspid regurgitation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Comparison of dimensions and functional features of mitral and tricuspid annuli in the same healthy adults: insights from the three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiographic MAGYAR-Healthy Study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Current guidelines recommend integrating several echocardiographic indices to evaluate the severity of tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Discordance of indices, including qualitative and quantitative methods, commonly exists in practice. The discordance among these parameters has not yet been fully elucidated. Methods: A total of 127 patients with recognizable TR jets without pulmonary regurgitation or intracardiac shunt were prospectively enrolled. We evaluated 8 parameters by 2-dimensional (2D) echocardiography: proximal iso-velocity surface area (PISA)-derived regurgitant volume (RVol), PISA-derived effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA), PISA radius, vena contracta width (VCW), color Doppler jet area, tricuspid valve annular diameter, inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter, and peak E wave. According to current guidelines, each echocardiographic parameter was determined to represent either severe or non-severe TR. A concordance score was calculated as the number of concordant parameters divided by 8, with a higher score reflecting better concordance. Data were further categorized into 3 subgroups: complete concordance (0 discordant parameters), high concordance (1-2 discordant parameters), and low concordance (3-4 discordant parameters). Results: The mean concordance score was 81%±17% for the entire cohort. There were 48 (38%) patients with complete concordance, including 6 patients with severe TR. In contrast, the low concordance group (n=43, 34%) mostly comprised severe TR patients (36 patients). When considering only EROA, RVol, and VCW, concordance improved, with 98 patients (77%) in complete agreement. Conclusions: Concordance seems limited when using echocardiographic parameters to assess TR severity. Applying only EROA, RVol, and VCW results in better concordance, as recommended by the current guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.