Tricuspid valve repair by DeVega technique versus ring annuloplasty in patients with functional severe tricuspid regurge

Abstract

BackgroundRepairing the tricuspid valve in patients undergoing left heart valve surgery is still controversial. Severe Tricuspid regurge is repaired by most surgeons, while moderate regurge is frequently unaddressed. Another controversy is the technique of repair. DeVega technique is widely used; still, the longevity of this repair is still questioned. The risk of its early failure and subsequent recurrence of significant regurge requiring redo surgery has led many surgeons to adopt the use of annuloplasty rings. The aim of our study was to assess the short term results (1 year) of tricuspid repair with or without ring annuloplasty. Patients and methods80 patients who had tricuspid repair concomitantly with mitral valve surgery at Cairo University Hospitals over 5 years were studied by echocardiography at discharge and at 1 year after surgery. Results62 patients had repair using the DeVega annuloplasty (group A) while 18 had ring annuloplasty (group B). The mean age was 33 ± 6 years and 37 ± 8 years for group A and B respectively. The cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time was relatively longer in group B. There was only one mortality in group A. Echocardiography done for all patients of both groups at discharge and at 1 year postoperatively showed no significant difference between both groups. ConclusionTricuspid repair using ring annuloplasty has good results but with no significant benefits over DeVega annuloplasty at one year.