ArticleJTCVS open2026
Four-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after tricuspid valve replacement using a novel bovine pericardial valve bioprosthesis.
Article in JTCVS open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To describe our experience and evaluate the clinical outcomes and hemodynamic performance of a new bovine pericardial valve bioprosthesis when used off-label for tricuspid valve replacement (TVR). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 82 consecutive patients who underwent 83 TVR procedures (1 patient required early reoperation for paravalvular leak) with the new bioprosthesis between July 2021 and April 2025 at our institution. The mean clinical follow-up was 2.3 ± 1.1 years (94% completed), and the mean echocardiographic follow-up was 2.0 ± 1.1 years (75% completed). The primary end point was bioprosthetic valve dysfunction; secondary end points were survival, perioperative outcomes, major complications, and hemodynamic performance. Results: Mean age was 66.6 ± 14.0 years; 51.2% (42/82) were female. New York Heart Association class III-IV symptoms were present in 65.2% (45/69). Principal indications were annular dilatation (65.7%, 46/70) and TriClip failure (11.4%, 8/70). Mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons and TRI-SCORE were 6.9 ± 11.4 and 11.8 ± 7.1, respectively. Sternotomy was performed in 41.0% (34/83) and minimally invasive access in 59.0% (49/83). Concomitant procedures included left-sided valvular surgery (47.0%, 39/83) and left atrial appendage closure (26.5%, 22/83). The most common prosthesis size was 33 mm (67.5%, 56/83). As the primary end point, no valve thrombosis was observed and 2.6% (2/77) developed severe central tricuspid regurgitation (TR) requiring percutaneous reintervention. New moderate intraprosthetic TR occurred in 13.3% (6/45) of patients. Thirty-day mortality was 15.9% (13/82). Major complications included new pacemaker implantation (19.3%, 16/83), reoperation for bleeding (7.2%, 6/83), and cerebrovascular events (7.2%, 6/83). Echocardiography showed stable mean gradients (3.2 ± 1.3 mm Hg at discharge; 3.0 ± 1.2 mm Hg at latest follow-up). Otherwise, 1.3% (1/77) underwent redo TVR for early paravalvular leak. Bioprosthetic endocarditis occurred in 5.2% (4/77), all treated conservatively. Actuarial 4-year survival was 63% and freedom from valvular reintervention was 92%. Conclusions: The new bioprosthesis implanted in the tricuspid position in this high-risk cohort demonstrated stable hemodynamics; however, 2 cases of valvular dysfunction needing reintervention occurred at 2 years, with 6 cases of stable moderate central TR observed at follow-up. These complications highlight the need for longer follow-up to establish durability and guide patient selection and postoperative care.
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.