ArticleJTCVS open2025
Outcomes of isolated tricuspid replacement versus repair among older patients with tricuspid regurgitation in the United States.
Article in JTCVS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Outcomes of Leadless Versus Transvenous Pacemakers Following Tricuspid Valve Surgery.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Percutaneous and Surgical Interventions of Right-Sided Heart Masses in Older Patients: A Nationwide Comparative Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- The current state of isolated tricuspid valve surgery: how it complements transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Review
- Contemporary practice patterns and outcomes of isolated tricuspid valve surgery in North America: systematic review with meta-analysis.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- The relationship between in-hospital mortality and Naples prognostic score in patients undergoing tricuspid valve surgery.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2026Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Surgical and Transcatheter Interventions for Tricuspid Regurgitation: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Evidence is limited regarding early-term outcomes after isolated tricuspid operations for tricuspid regurgitation (TR). We compared the early-term outcomes after isolated tricuspid valve replacement versus repair using the contemporary data. Methods: We analyzed the national data on Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who underwent isolated tricuspid valve replacement or repair for TR between January 2016 and December 2020. The primary outcome was early-term (up to 3 years) all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes included early-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and heart failure hospitalizations. MACE encompassed all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, stroke, and tricuspid reoperations. A propensity score matching analysis was conducted to compare between replacement and repair. Results: A total of 1501 patients were included (replacement: 610 patients, repair: 891 patients). In the matched cohort (n = 547 in each group), the overall mortality and MACE were 39% and 46% at 3 years, respectively. Tricuspid valve replacement was associated with similar all-cause mortality in comparison to repair (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-1.30; Conclusions: Isolated surgical tricuspid valve replacement was associated with similar clinical outcomes compared to repair. Importantly, the high overall early-term mortality and morbidity with either treatment underscores the need for alternative intervention choices and further research to optimize the indication and timing of intervention.
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.