Concomitant tricuspid repair in mitral regurgitation surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background Tricuspid Regurgitation (TR) is common in patients with severe mitral disease. However, the evidence is insufficient to inform a decision about whether to perform prophylactic tricuspid-valve repair during mitral-valve surgery in patients who have moderate TR or less-than-moderate regurgitation. Purpose To compare the outcomes of concomitant tricuspid repair in mitral valve surgery versus no concomitant tricuspid repair in less-than-severe TR patients. Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases, in December 2021, for interventional studies comparing concomitant tricuspid repair in mitral valve surgery versus no tricuspid intervention. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Results Four randomised trials were included, providing a total of 651 patients (323 in prophylactic tricuspid intervention group and 328 patients in conservative group). Our meta-analysis showed a similar all-cause mortality for concomitant prophylactic tricuspid repair compared with no tricuspid intervention (pooled OR, 0.54; 95% CI [0.25, 1.15], P=0.11; I2=0%). Additionally, there is a similar New York Heart Association (NYHA) III–IV classes in both groups, despite a lower trend in the tricuspid intervention group (pooled OR, 0.63; 95% CI [0.38, 1.06], P=0.08; I2=0%) (Figure 3). However, there was a significant lower progression of TR (pooled OR, 0.06; 95% CI [0.02, 0.24], P<0.01; I2=0%) and moderate-severe TR (pooled OR, 0.23; 95% CI [0.11, 0.46], P<0.01; I2=27%). Conclusions Our pooled analysis suggests that a tricuspid-valve repair at the time of mitral-valve surgery in patients with moderate or less-than-moderate TR does not impact perioperative or postoperative all-cause mortality, despite reducing TR severity and progression of TR following intervention. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.