MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399113817 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jeae141

Refining the grading of tricuspid regurgitation: enhancing outcome prediction and patient management

2024· letter· en· W4399113817 on OpenAlexaff
Julien Dreyfus, Patrizio Lancellotti, Ian G. Burwash, David Messika–Zeitoun

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)MedicineInternal medicineRefining (metallurgy)Outcome (game theory)Regurgitation (circulation)CardiologyEngineeringEconomicsMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This editorial refers to ‘Tricuspid regurgitation severity grades: is more always better?’, by R.T. Hahn and J.L. Zamorano, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeae143. Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) exists along a continuum with outcomes worsening as TR severity increases, encompassing impaired quality of life, heart failure and death.1–5 While the management of patients with severe TR was until recently mostly medical, largely comprising of diuretics to minimize volume overload and control oedema, an increasing number of patients are now offered a curative treatment. This shift has been made possible by a better understanding of the important factors relevant to the assessment of operative risk,6 enabling an earlier and more timely referral to surgery, and by the development of transcatheter therapies with both valve repair and replacement systems.7 Previous American and European Echocardiographic Societies advocated for a classification system that stratifies TR into three grades of severity (‘mild’, ‘moderate’ and ‘severe’).8,9 Notably, patients referred for transcatheter therapies often present with extensive TR and large gaps. Acknowledging the continuum of TR severity and its impact on outcome, Hahn and Zamorano10 have suggested expanding the grading system beyond ‘severe’ to include ‘massive’ and ‘torrential’ grades. These two new grades have been incorporated into the latest European recommendations for patients being considered for transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions.11 However, on the other side of the spectrum, there is much less granularity with less than ‘severe’ TR, limited to only ‘mild’ or ‘moderate’ TR.9–11 This raises several potential concerns. First, classification of TR severity differs from that of mitral regurgitation (MR), which consists of four grades (‘mild’, ‘moderate’ and ‘severe’ with the moderate grade further subdivided into ‘mild-to-moderate’ and ‘moderate-to-severe’).11 This inconstancy has practical implications and many centres use a four-grade classification for TR severity based on the analogy with the MR classification. Describing severe TR as grade 3 out of 5 can be potentially misleading. Secondly, and more critically, the ‘moderate’ TR grade group encompasses a wide range of TR severity (ERO from 20 to 39 mm2), thereby grouping patients with very diverse outcomes. Recent findings from TRIGISTRY, a large international multicenter registry of patients with severe isolated functional TR, have shown that subdividing the ‘moderate’ grade into ‘mild-to-moderate’ and ‘moderate-to-severe’, mirroring the approach used for MR, further refines the prognosis of TR patients. In 613 patients who underwent a transcatheter tricuspid valve repair, subdividing the ‘moderate’ TR grade into ‘mild-to-moderate’ and ‘moderate-to-severe’ TR provided a better prognostic discrimination. Patients with ‘mild-to-moderate’ residual TR at discharge exhibited a better 2-year survival rate than the ‘moderate-to-severe’ residual TR group, with the former group approaching survival rates similar to that of ‘mild’ residual TR. On the other hand, patients with ‘moderate-to-severe’ residual TR faced a bleaker prognosis, trending towards those with ‘severe’ residual TR.12 This issue is even more critical as 38% of patients exhibited ‘moderate’ residual TR in TRILUMINATE,13 and 35% in TRIGISTRY,14 a sizable population who might benefit from improved prognostication. Furthermore, it has been shown that achieving ‘mild-to-moderate’ or lower residual TR at discharge post tricuspid valve surgery or transcatheter tricuspid valve repair was imperative to ensure a satisfactory 2-year survival rate in comparison to medical therapy alone.14 We therefore advocate for a new TR severity classification consisting of four grades (‘mild’, ‘mild-to-moderate’, ‘moderate-to-severe’ and ‘severe’), aligning with the classification used for MR in the latest European recommendations,11 or six grades if we incorporate the ‘massive’ and ‘torrential’ grades (Figure 1). Assessing TR severity requires a comprehensive multiparametric approach, integrating both quantitative and semi-quantitative measures, ideally conducted under euvolemia.9,11,15,16 Arbitrarily, we have partitioned the effective regurgitation orifice area range of the ‘moderate’ grade at the mid-point to discriminate ‘mild-to-moderate’ from ‘moderate-to-severe’ TR, but it is now crucial that scientific societies and experts come together to establish optimal criteria for subdividing the ‘moderate’ group based on the analysis of outcome studies. Proposal for a Refined Tricuspid Regurgitation Grading. ASE, American Society of Echocardiography; EACVI, European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging; EROA, Effective Regurgitant Orifice Area. This more granular classification holds significant prognostic value and should influence therapeutic decisions. The objectives of transcatheter tricuspid valve repair treatment were initially to reduce TR by at least one or two grades using the five-grade scheme including the ‘massive’ and ‘torrential’ grades. It is now imperative to focus less on grade reduction, but instead to achieve the smallest possible residual regurgitation, ‘mild-to-moderate’ or lower. This shift in paradigm will result in prompt adjustments in patient management, involving the adoption of individualized therapeutic strategies aimed at achieving this goal. When a transcatheter tricuspid valve repair intervention is considered but the results are expected to be suboptimal with a low likelihood of achieving ‘mild-to moderate’ or lower residual TR, transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement should be considered. In conclusion, subdividing the ‘moderate’ TR severity grade into ‘mild-to-moderate’ and ‘moderate-to-severe’, aligns with the classification for MR, enhances accuracy in outcome prediction compared to the current classification system and standardizes language regardless of the atrioventricular valve described. This approach holds the potential to influence and improve patient management. None declared. No data were collected for this editorial.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→