If a dog has an **anatomically normal** tricuspid valve on Echo, but has mild regurg and a grade 1-2 murmur would it be classified as TVD?? My understanding is that to be diagnosed as TVD there had to be a structural change in the valve. The cardiologist rated it as trivial TVD.

I've never heard that term before as a diagnoses - trivial TVD.

Is there anything I should ask the cardiologist for clarification?

I am not sure I understand your question. Did you leave the echo appointment without a diagnosis or whether or not your dog cleared the echo? Did you mean to say that the cardiologist told you your dog had an "equivocal" rating? By definition your dog (probably?) has TVD because the tricuspid valve allows (mild) regurgitation, (which means it must be malformed somehow), and the subsequent grade 1-2 murmur. Why didn't you ask questions at the time of the exam if you didn't understand the results?

The fact is that if there is a murmur there is blood going the wrong way. You need to find out where the malformation is. Not all the time you are going to find abnormal valves with murmurs. An enlarged heart can also cause murmurs. Not that that diagnosis is any better.

But the problem is on the RIGHT, correct? That's the TVD side. An Echo is not a 100% clear photograph of the internal workings of the heart. So just because they didn't clearly see anything doesn't mean that something is not right. Obviously for a murmur and regurgitation, something is not right.

If the dog is young or the cardiologist is not a seasoned veteran, you MAY want to check again in a year.

Tricuspid insufficiency has more causes than TVD. Here is an understandable description:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tricuspid_insufficiency

Here is another excellent description of tricuspid
regurgitation from a children's hospital.

mykentuckyheart.com/information/TricuspidRegurgitation.htmBackground

Mild Tricuspid regurgitation may be detected in over 90% of the normal population by color Doppler echocardiogram. This is usually a benign finding and does not require any follow up or treatment. Virtually all of the normal population will have a mild degree of leakage in one, two, or three of the heart valves by echocardiogram. We call this physiologic regurgitation and many cardiologists prefer not to mention it to parents, as they may become concerned about a common and benign echocardiogram finding.

Pathologic tricuspid regurgitation is a disorder involving backward flow of blood across the tricuspid valve from the right ventricle (lower heart chamber) to the right atrium (upper heart chamber). Leakage occurs during contraction of the right ventricle and may be caused by damage or malformation of the tricuspid valve or and/or by significant enlargement of the right heart. The tricuspid valve may have been damaged by infection (endocarditis). In other cases, it may be a congenital malformation in the valve itself such as a dysplastic pulmonary valve or Ebstein’s anomaly of the tricuspid valve.

Tricuspid regurgitation may also be present in cases of distal anatomic obstructions such as pulmonary valve atresia or in cases of pulmonary hypertension (high pressures in the lungs). Rarely it may be caused by an unusual tumor called a carcinoid, rheumatoid arthritis, radiation therapy, Marfan’s syndrome, or chest trauma. Finally, tricuspid regurgitation is found in many patients with a single ventricle, corrected transposition of the great arteries or those who underwent the Fontan procedure in which the right ventricle is acting as the main pump of the heart. Those patients require lifetime follow up with serial echocardiograms. The tricuspid regurgitation may become severe enough to require heart surgery.

Other potential causes of significant tricuspid regurgitation include restrictive cardiomyopathy and constrictive pericarditis.

I am not sure how an article from a children's hospital is relevant to a discussion on canine TVD? I would like to see an article on tricuspid regurgitation/insuffiency more geared to dogs than human pediatrics, although that was a pretty good article.

The hearts are not terribly different. The diseases, not terribly different. The possible problems, not terribly different. The diagnostic tools are the same. If you have a good article specifically about canines that explains the problems, by all means post it. In the meantime, learn what you can from human medicine.

My board certified cardiologist explains things very thoroughly and clearly. I get my information from him.

Well, that's great. I posted these articles because the OP did not understand the cardiologist's statements. If your cardiologist has an article that explains heart functioning as clearly as these, by all means post it.

If I were you, I would call the Cardiologist that you used and ask him/her to explain it to you in terms that you can understand. You paid that Dr. for a service which he/she performed and part of that service is to make the results understandable to the client. Luckily, I have only had one dog diagnosed with TVD, but I left the clinic with an explanation in writing, including measurements of the dogs heart and the rate of flow etc., so that if I wanted a second opinion I could compare the results. I did not have to ask Dr. Morris for this, she automatically does it. I hope that you get the answers that you are looking for :)

It appears to me that the OP did an echo to determine
if the dog's heart indicated he was suitable for breeding. The cardiologist told the OP that the tricuspid valve had only the "trivial" anatomical differences that can occur normally between dogs.

Unless the cardiologist saw some indication of pathological changes in the heart, mild regurgitation (grade 1-2 murmur) could also be an insignificant finding. Evidently, from the OP's post, no pathological findings accompanied the mild regurgitation.

Posting these findings here has given the OP some idea of the different way that breeders will interpret what the cardiologist told the OP. Some people assume that any tricuspid murmur or regurgitation indicates pathology--even when the cardiologist says that the heart is "anatomically normal."

Certainly the OP should confirm what the terms "anatomically normal" and "trivial" meant to the cardiologist and the significance of the terms "mild regurgitation" or a "grade 1-2 murmur" without pathological findings to the cardiologist. Whether breeders will use the dog is subject to all the interpretations that breeders put on the cardiologist's choice of words.

Rather than rely on any lay person's post who uses the words "interpret","interpretation", "appear", "evidently", "assume", etc. the OP absolutely should get the clarification from his cardiologist before relying on the "so-called" expert advice of non-cardiologists. No flames, JMHO.

I tempered my terms because the available information from the OP is minimal. I am not apologizing for being circumspect based on little available data. However, perhaps you missed the fact that I said that the OP should "CERTAINLY" check out the meaning of the terms used by the cardiologist with the cardiologist. I gave no advice whatsoever except to say that the OP should check out the meaning of the cardiologist's words.

I suspect that the OP also wanted to know how people would react to the words used by the cardiologist. Whether my suspicion is correct or not matters little because the OP got an earful of how people will react to the words used by the cardiologist. And this is what the OP is going to face if they try to hold this stud out as a stud dog, despite the fact that the OP was evidently told that the dog was "anatomically normal."

I have had over ten of my dogs echoed by a board certified cardiologist. How many echo exams performed by a board certified cardiologist have your dogs had? My advice is to listen to the expert who has performed the exam when you have any questions or concerns. If you do not understand, ask additional questions. I would not rely on the opinions given on an anonymous forum,or by people in whom I have little confidence. Opinions are like a$$holes, everyone has one.

So glad you spoke up Breeder 3. Kate has made herself clear, she doesn't believe in dopplers but she stuffs her opinions any place she can. PHD's are not medical doctors.

I speak to my human cardio for myself and vet cardio for the dogs. My human cardio gives her input about the dogs too speaking about the heart as an organ of the body. She feels we're doing the right thing doing echoes as they can show any heart malformation including the genetic TVD.

My human cardio has done 6 echoes on me and I'm going to be 50 soon. She goes by family history and my family has many heart ailments, alive or deceased. She also does CT scans of the heart andddddddddddd stress tests but not as frequent as auscultation along with echoes.

So 1 darn doppler in a dogs lifetime isn't too much to ask of us to do because we have no other genetic testing.

Breeder 3, congrats on that many dopplers on your dogs. That's also family history, the medical history of your dogs. Good for you! If we all do what you have, we'll have several generations and lotsa knowlege about our lines. 10 dogs with auscultations is better then nothing but not enough when ECHO clinics cost $75 to $175. When we didn't have those, we did the auscultations, those of us that cared after 1995 anyway.

I happen to agree about some anons on this list. I will not listen to them for important discussions like the heart or tricuspid valve unless they add their name and have a leg to stand on with years of experience. No one need listen to me either without a name but I won't let the know-it-alls, silver breeders or PM trolls bite me so I am nameless but I have an opinion. I echo all of my dogs that will be bred. You, the Kates and the cheapos that whine they don't have the money, do whatever you want and live with it. When a buyer sues you for not having echod your bitch, you hire the lawyer too.

You are correct. You should not listen to anonymous
people on this forum, especially one who uses her
anonymity to carry on scurrilous personal vendettas against another breeder and who is so bent by this vendetta that she discounts any information that I say.

Let us bring this back to the OP who did an echo and whose CARDIOLOGIST said that the OP's dog had an
"anatomically normal" heart with "trivial" differences
between their dog's tricuspid value and other anatomically normal dogs' tricuspid valves. As I posted from the children's hospital website, mild regurgitation on echocardiogram is extremely common and, if not accompanied by some pathological anatomical or functional findings, would be interpreted in human medicine as unimportant.

I posted because I simply felt compassion for the OP who was getting so much misinformation on this forum. But the OP (or anyone else who gets these kinds of results) should not take my word for it or even the child's hospital website. Check it out with your cardiologist who said that your dog's heart was "anatomically normal." Then you can figure out how you are going to deal with bozos who feel justified in attacking from anonymous perches because your cardiologist used wording they didn't understand.