MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408845383 · doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezaf107

Long-term outcomes after bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement: a multicenter study

2025· article· en· W4408845383 on OpenAlexaff
Antonio Piperata, Jef Van den Eynde, Mateo Marin‐Cuartas, Giacomo Bortolussi, Petr Fila, Tim Walter, Mehmet Cahit Sarıcaoğlu, Ján Gofus, Bilkhu Rajdeep, Michel Pompeu Sá, Fabrizio Rosati, Manuela De La Cuestac, Elisa Gastino, Besart Cuko, Julien Ternacle, Carlo de Vincentiisd, Martin Czerny, Ahmet Rüçhan Akar, Gianluca Lucchese, Basel Ramlawi, Michael A. Borger, Thomas Modine

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTricuspid valveAtrioventricular blockSurgeryConcomitantCardiologyInternal medicineEndocarditisCumulative incidenceRetrospective cohort studyProportional hazards modelValve replacementTransplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Long-term evidence about bioprosthetic tricuspid valve replacement is scarce. This study aims to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of patients who underwent tricuspid valve replacement with bioprostheses. METHODS: This multicentre retrospective study included patients from 10 high-volume centres in 7 different countries, who underwent tricuspid valve replacement with bioprostheses. Echocardiographic and clinical data were reviewed. Long-term outcomes were investigated using Kaplan-Meier estimates, Cox regression, and competing risk analysis. RESULTS: Of 675 patients, isolated tricuspid valve replacement was performed in 358 patients (53%), while 317 (47%) underwent concomitant procedures. Between these 2 groups, patients who underwent combined procedures reported a significantly higher incidence of infection, atrioventricular block, multi-organ failure, longer intensive care unit and hospital stay and higher 30-day mortality over patients who underwent isolated procedure. The overall 30-day mortality occurred in 70 patients (10.4%) [46 (14.6%) combined vs 24 (6.74%) isolated, P = 0.001]. During the follow-up, there was a continuous rate of attrition due to death, with cumulative incidences of death at 5, 10 and 15 years being 27.2%, 46.2% and 60.6%, respectively. In contrast, the risk of reintervention starts to significantly increase after 10 years of follow-up, with cumulative incidences of reintervention being 6.1%, 10.8% and 23.3%, respectively. Freedom from tricuspid valve reintervention, pacemaker implantation, tricuspid valve endocarditis and major thromboembolic events at 15 years were 56.5%, 77.3%, 84.0% and 86.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Tricuspid valve replacement with bioprostheses is an effective treatment for valvular disease, despite being associated with relatively high early and long-term mortality. However, the risk of structural valve degeneration rises significantly after 10 years.

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)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic SurgerySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207