Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention: to repair or to replace?

Purpose of review The burden of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is high in the aging population, almost 4% in the age group over 75 have moderate or more TR. This carries a poor prognosis and an increased incidence of mortality, prolonged hospitalization, and rehospitalization in symptomatic patients with severe TR is observed. Percutaneous tricuspid valve intervention has emerged as a viable therapeutic option, with an increasingly large toolbox of both tricuspid repair and replacement devices. The optimal strategy, timing and patient selection for transcatheter intervention are yet to be determined. This review focuses on the current strengths and limitations of transcatheter tricuspid repair vs. replacement, drawing on lessons learned from surgery. Recent findings Early outcome studies have been published in the last 2 years for many of the new percutaneous tricuspid valve devices. We have summarized these results and compared them to surgical tricuspid valve repair and replacement. We found that surgical data shows a tendency to better outcome with tricuspid valve repair compared to replacement. For transcatheter interventions studies comparing repair and replacement are lacking but both interventions show good procedural success rates and are efficient in reducing the grade of tricuspid regurgitation. Summary Transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions offer a safe and effective alternative to tricuspid surgery or medical therapy. The decision between valve replacement and repair should be based on patient anatomy, operator experience and device availability until head-to-head comparison of different devices are available.