ArticleJTCVS open2023
Tricuspid valve replacement provides better long-term survival and tricuspid valve function than repair in patients with systemic right ventricle.
Article in JTCVS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term prognosis and risk factors in tricuspid valve replacement surgery: a single-center study.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare the long-term outcomes of 2 different tricuspid surgeries including valvuloplasty and replacement for significant tricuspid regurgitation in patients with systemic right ventricle. Method: This is a retrospective study of 34 patients with dextro-transposition of the great arteries or levo-transposition of the great arteries with biventricular circulation and systemic right ventricle undergoing tricuspid valve surgery between April 1979 and April 2022. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the procedure: tricuspid valvuloplasty (n = 11) and tricuspid valve replacement (n = 23). These groups were compared in terms of survival, tricuspid valve dysfunction, and tricuspid valve-related reoperation. Results: There was no significant difference between the groups in operative age, body weight, the proportion of dextro-transposition of the great arteries, Ebstein-like tricuspid dysplasia, and preoperative right ventricular volume/function. During the median follow-up of 9.7 years, there was 1 early death (tricuspid valvuloplasty group) and 4 late deaths (3 in tricuspid valvuloplasty group and 1 in tricuspid valve replacement group). There were 7 tricuspid valve dysfunctions, including 6 significant tricuspid regurgitations in the tricuspid valvuloplasty group and 1 prosthetic valve dysfunction in the tricuspid valve replacement group, and 4 tricuspid valve-related reoperations (3 in the tricuspid valvuloplasty group and 1 in the tricuspid valve replacement group) were performed. There were significant differences between the groups in survival (tricuspid valvuloplasty vs tricuspid valve replacement: 72.7 vs 94.7% at 10 years after surgery, Conclusions: Tricuspid valve replacement provided better long-term survival and tricuspid function in patients with systemic right ventricle compared with tricuspid valvuloplasty.
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.