MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403847655 · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2024.10.086

Tricuspid Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair for Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation

2024· article· en· W4403847655 on OpenAlexaff
Gilbert H.L. Tang, Rebecca T. Hahn, Brian Whisenant, Nadira Hamid, Hursh Naik, Raj Makkar, Peter Tadros, Matthew J. Price, Gagan D. Singh, Neil Fam, Saibal Kar, Shamir R. Mehta, Richard Bae, Nishant K. Sekaran, Travis Warner, Moody Makar, George L. Zorn, Raymond L. Benza, Ulrich P. Jorde, Patrick M. McCarthy, Vinod H. Thourani, Qian Ren, Phillip M. Trusty, Paul Sorajja, David Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersAbbott Vascular
KeywordsMedicineRegurgitation (circulation)CohortRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a right-sided valvular disease independently associated with morbidity and mortality. The TRILUMINATE Pivotal (Clinical Trial to Evaluate Cardiovascular Outcomes In Patients Treated With the Tricuspid Valve Repair System Pivotal) is the first randomized controlled trial assessing the impact of TR reduction with tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (T-TEER). OBJECTIVES: Outcomes from the full randomized cohort of the TRILUMINATE Pivotal trial have not been previously reported, and the additional enrollment may further support the safety and effectiveness of T-TEER through 1 year. METHODS: The TRILUMINATE Pivotal trial is an international randomized controlled trial of T-TEER with the TriClip device in patients with symptomatic, severe TR. Adaptive trial design allowed enrollment past the primary analysis population. The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite of all-cause mortality or tricuspid valve surgery, heart failure hospitalizations (HFHs), and quality-of-life improvement measured by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) at 1 year. RESULTS: Between August 21, 2019, and June 29, 2022, 572 subjects were randomized, including the primary cohort (n = 350) and subsequent enrollment (n = 222). Subjects were older (78.1 ± 7.8 years) and predominantly female (58.9%), with atrial fibrillation (87.8%) and prior HFH (23.8%). The primary endpoint was met for the full cohort (win ratio = 1.84; P < 0.0001). Freedom from all-cause mortality and tricuspid valve surgery through 12 months was 90.6% and 89.9% for the device and control groups, respectively (P = 0.82). Annualized HFH rate was comparable between device and control subjects (0.17 vs 0.20 events/patient-year; P = 0.40). A significant treatment effect was observed for change in quality of life with 52.3% of device subjects achieving a ≥15-point KCCQ score improvement (compared with 23.5% of control subjects; P < 0.0001). All secondary endpoints favored T-TEER: moderate or less TR at 30 days (88.9% vs 5.3%; P < 0.0001), KCCQ change at 1 year (13.0 ± 1.4 points vs -0.5 ± 1.4 points; P < 0.0001), and 6-minute walk distance change at 1 year (1.7 ± 7.5 m vs -27.4 ± 7.4 m; P < 0.0001). Freedom from major adverse events was 98.9% for T-TEER (vs performance goal: 90%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: TriClip was safe and effective in the full randomized cohort of TRILUMINATE Pivotal with significant TR reduction and improvements in 6-minute walk distance and health status. Rates of all-cause mortality or tricuspid valve surgery and HFH through 1 year were not reduced by T-TEER.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations71
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of CardiologySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207