↓ Skip to main content

The International Multicenter TriValve Registry Which Patients Are Undergoing Transcatheter Tricuspid Repair?

Overview of attention for article published in JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
42 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
187 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The International Multicenter TriValve Registry Which Patients Are Undergoing Transcatheter Tricuspid Repair?
Published in
JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, October 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.jcin.2017.08.011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maurizio Taramasso, Rebecca T. Hahn, Hannes Alessandrini, Azeem Latib, Adrian Attinger-Toller, Daniel Braun, Eric Brochet, Kim A. Connelly, Paolo Denti, Florian Deuschl, Andrea Englmaier, Neil Fam, Christian Frerker, Joerg Hausleiter, Jean-Michel Juliard, Ryan Kaple, Felix Kreidel, Karl Heinz Kuck, Shingo Kuwata, Marco Ancona, Margarita Malasa, Tamim Nazif, Georg Nickenig, Fabian Nietlispach, Alberto Pozzoli, Ulrich Schäfer, Joachim Schofer, Robert Schueler, Gilbert Tang, Alec Vahanian, John G. Webb, Ermela Yzeiraj, Francesco Maisano, Martin B. Leon

Abstract

This study sought to develop a large, international registry to evaluate the diffusion of these approaches and investigate patient characteristics and initial clinical results. Several transcatheter tricuspid valve therapies are emerging as therapeutic options for patients with severe symptomatic tricuspid regurgitation (TR), generally a high-risk surgical population. The TriValve (Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies) registry included 106 high-risk patients (76 ± 9 years of age; 60.4% women; European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II 7.6 ± 5.7%) from 11 cardiac centers, with severe TR. A total of 35% of the patients had prior left heart valve intervention (surgical in 29 of 106 and transcatheter in 8 of 106 patients). Right ventricular (RV) dysfunction (tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion <17 mm) was present in 56.3% of the patients; 95% of the patients were in New York Heart Association functional class III to IV. The etiology of TR was functional in 95.2%, and the mean tricuspid annulus was 45.4 ± 11 mm. In 76.9% of the patients, the main location of the regurgitant jet was central; pre-procedural systolic pulmonary artery pressure was 39.7 ± 13.8 mm Hg; and the inferior vena cava was severely dilated in most of the patients (27.4 ± 6.8 mm). Implanted devices included MitraClip (n = 58), Trialign (n = 17), TriCinch (n = 15), FORMA (n = 7), Cardioband (n = 5), and caval valve implantation (n = 3). One case had combined Trialign + MitraClip. Patients treated with the different techniques were similar in terms of European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II and degree of RV dysfunction. In 68% of the cases the tricuspid intervention was performed as an isolated procedure. Procedural success was achieved in 62% of cases. At 30-day follow-up, all-cause mortality was 3.7%, with an overall incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events of 26%; 58% of the patients were New York Heart Association functional class I or II at 30 days. Patients currently undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve therapy are mostly high risk, with a functional etiology and very severe central regurgitation, and do not have severely impaired RV function. Initial results suggest that transcatheter tricuspid valve therapy is feasible with different techniques, but clinical efficacy requires further investigation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 30%
Other 8 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 29 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 49%
Engineering 4 4%
Mathematics 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 39 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,203,624
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#486
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,269
of 332,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
#14
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.