ReviewFuture cardiology2026
Tricuspid valve edge to edge repair vs replacement - a comparative analysis and future directions.
Review in Future cardiology, 2026. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a common yet underrecognized valvular disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Recent advances in transcatheter therapies, namely transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (T-TEER) with the TriClip device (Abbott) and transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) with the EVOQUE device (Edwards Lifesciences), offer promising alternatives to surgery for severe symptomatic TR. This review compares both approaches with a focus on safety, procedural considerations, and clinical outcomes. Treating TR remains uniquely challenging due to the anatomical complexity of the valve, frequent lead interference, and common coexistence of RV dysfunction, atrial fibrillation, and pulmonary hypertension. Many affected patients are elderly and frail, rendering them poor surgical candidates. Optimal treatment requires individualized decision-making guided by detailed imaging and assessment of RV function and valvular anatomy. Both therapies achieve significant TR reduction, yet each carries distinct risks: TTVR is associated with higher rates of pacemaker implantation, bleeding, and RV failure, while T-TEER may lead to single leaflet device attachment (SLDA), leaflet injury, or residual TR. Careful patient selection is essential. Despite encouraging short-term outcomes, long-term data are needed to determine survival benefit and durability. Further studies are warranted to refine technique and optimize candidate selection.
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.