ArticleJACC. Asia2025
Clinical Characteristics, Outcomes, and Risk Stratification of Combined Mitral and Tricuspid Regurgitation: The China-VHD Study.
Article in JACC. Asia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in the clinical management and prognostication of mitral regurgitation: a systematic review.The Egyptian heart journal : (EHJ) : official bulletin of the Egyptian Society of Cardiology · 2026Review
- Advancing Tricuspid Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair in Asia: Insights From the Initial T-TEER Experience.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- Beyond multivalvular disease: imaging-guided diagnosis and management of combined functional mitral and tricuspid regurgitation.European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2025Article
- The Evolving Landscape of Tricuspid Regurgitation Management.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
- Navigating the Dual Challenge: Insights From the China-VHD Study on Mitral and Tricuspid Regurgitation.JACC. Asia · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCombined mitral regurgitation (MR) and tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is related to more complicated hemodynamic burdens than isolated atrioventricular valve regurgitation.
objectivesThis study aimed to investigate clinical characteristics and outcomes of combined MR and TR, as well as developing dedicated prognostic instruments.
methodsA total of 6,704 patients with ≥ moderate MR or TR from the China Valvular Heart Disease study were included in this analysis. The study outcomes included all-cause mortality, death or hospitalization for heart failure, and worsening functional status or death within 2 years.
resultsCompared with those with isolated valvular regurgitation, patients with combined MR and TR more often experienced atrial fibrillation or flutter and pulmonary hypertension. During a median follow-up of 733 days (Q1, Q3: 706, 749 days), 624 (9.3%) deaths occurred. Combined MR and TR was related to poorer 2-year outcomes than isolated MR, and was independently associated with worse prognosis in symptomatic patients (all-cause mortality: MR vs MR+TR, HR: 0.776 [95% CI: 0.616-0.978]; P = 0.031) and those with normal left ventricular systolic function (composite endpoint: HR: 0.629 [95% CI: 0.400-0.990]; P = 0.045). Based on carefully evaluated predictors of mortality, a prognostic nomogram and a risk score were developed and externally validated for patients with combined MR and TR, with superior predictive performance than the MitraScore and comparable discrimination compared with artificial intelligence-derived models.
conclusionsPatients with combined MR and TR displayed worse clinical profiles and poorer outcomes compared with those with isolated MR. The novel prognostic tools may improve personalized risk assessment of combined MR and TR.
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.