Durability of suture versus ring tricuspid annuloplasty: Looking at very long term (18 years)

Background: Several papers already reported better outcomes of tricuspid valve repair with ring annuloplasty compared to suture techniques. However, the follow-up is usually limited to 10 years. With this study, we aim to analyze the results of tricuspid valve repair according to the technique employed when the follow-up is extended to more than 15 years. Materials and methods: A retrospective review of our institutional database was carried on to find all patients who underwent tricuspid valve repair between January 1998 and December 2004. Kaplan–Meier method was employed to estimate survival and log-rank test was used to make intergroup comparison. Cox regression was employed to identify risk factor for mortality. Cumulative incidence function using death as competitive outcome was used to estimate cardiac death. To describe the time course of tricuspid regurgitation, a longitudinal analysis using generalized estimating equations with random intercept for correlated data was performed. Results: One hundred forty-six patients were identified: 89 in the suture group and 57 in the ring group. No difference in term of long-term survival and cardiac death was evident between the two groups. A significant higher rate of tricuspid regurgitation ≥2+ and ≥3+ recurrence was evident in the suture group during the whole follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Our results corroborate the better results of tricuspid valve repair by means of ring implantation compared to suture techniques also when the follow-up is extended up to 18 years. Ring annuloplasty should be considered the first option for tricuspid valve repair due to a better durability.