Characteristics and outcomes of patients with atrial versus ventricular secondary tricuspid regurgitation undergoing tricuspid transcatheter edge‐to‐edge repair – Results from the TriValve registry

Abstract

AbstractAimFunctional or secondary tricuspid regurgitation (STR) is the most common phenotype of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) with atrial STR (ASTR) and ventricular STR (VSTR) being recently identified as two distinct entities. Data on tricuspid transcatheter edge‐to‐edge repair (T‐TEER) in patients with STR according to phenotype (i.e. ASTR vs. VSTR) are lacking. The aim of this study was to assess characteristics and outcomes of patients with ASTR versus VSTR undergoing T‐TEER.Methods and resultsPatients with STR undergoing T‐TEER were selected from the Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies (TriValve) registry. ASTR was defined by (i) left ventricular ejection fraction ≥50%, (ii) atrial fibrillation, and (iii) systolic pulmonary artery pressure <50 mmHg. Patients not matching these criteria were classified as VSTR. Patients with primary TR and cardiac implantable electronic device were excluded. Key endpoints included procedural success and survival at follow‐up. A total of 298 patients were enrolled in the study: 65 (22%) with ASTR and 233 (78%) with VSTR. Procedural success was similar in the two groups (80% vs. 83% for ASTR vs. VSTR, p = 0.56) and TEER was effective in reducing TR in both groups (from 97% of patients with baseline TR ≥3+ to 23% in ASTR and to 15% in VSTR, all p = 0.001). At 12‐month follow‐up, survival was significantly higher in the ASTR versus VSTR cohort (91% vs. 72%, log‐rank p = 0.02), with VSTR being an independent predictor of mortality at multivariable analysis (hazard ratio 4.75).ConclusionsIn a real‐world, multicentre registry, T‐TEER was effective in reducing TR grade in both ASTR and VSTR. At 12‐month follow‐up, ASTR showed better survival than VSTR.