Does tricuspid valve detachment improve outcomes compared with the non-tricuspid valve detachment approach in ventricular septal defect closure?

Abstract

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether the tricuspid valve detachment (TVD) approach to ventricular septal defect repair provides superior outcomes compared with the non-TVD approach. Altogether more than 54 papers were found using the reported search, of which 10 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. A total of 2059 participants were enrolled in the 10 studies, including 2 prospective studies and 8 retrospective studies. Six studies demonstrated a longer cardiopulmonary bypass time or aortic clamp time in the TVD group, whereas 4 studies showed no difference. Only 1 study reported a lower incidence of trivial tricuspid regurgitation in the TVD group, whereas the other 9 studies showed no significant difference. One study showed that a higher incidence of residual shunting occurred in those patients who had indications for TVD but did not perform detachment during surgery. No difference in postoperative residual shunting was demonstrated in the other 9 studies. We conclude that surgeons should be reassured that if TVD is required to repair the ventricular septal defect, although it may lead to longer cardiopulmonary bypass time and cross-clamp times, outcomes are equivalent in terms of the degree of tricuspid regurgitation and incidence of the residual ventricular septal defect.

Keywords: Evidence-based medicine; Review; Tricuspid valve detachment; Ventricular septal defect.