Background: Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS) assessed the cardiovascular (CV) safety of sitagliptin versus placebo on CV outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and CV disease and found sitagliptin noninferior to placebo. Subsequently, based on feedback from FDA, the Sponsor of the trial, Merck & Co., Inc., engaged a separate academic research organization, the TIMI Study Group, to re‐adjudicate a prespecified set of originally adjudicated events. Methods: TIMI adjudicated in a blinded fashion all potential hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) events, all potential MACE+ events previously adjudicated as not an endpoint event, and a random subset (~10%) of MACE+ events previously adjudicated as an endpoint event. An updated study‐level meta‐analysis of four randomized, placebo‐controlled, CV outcomes trials with dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP‐4) inhibitors was then performed. Results: After re‐adjudication of potential HHF events in the intent‐to‐treat population, there were 224 patients with a confirmed event in the sitagliptin arm (1.05/100 person‐years) and 239 patients in the placebo arm (1.13/100 person‐years), corresponding to a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.94 (95% confidence interval 95% CI: 0.78–1.13, p =.49). Concordance between the outcome of the original adjudication and the re‐adjudication for HHF events was 82.7%. The meta‐analysis of CV outcomes trials with DPP‐4 inhibitors with placebo and involving 43 522 patients yielded an HR of 1.07 (95% CI: 0.83–1.39), with moderate heterogeneity (p =.45, Isup.2 = 62.07%). Conclusion: The results of this independent re‐adjudication process and analyses of CV outcomes from TECOS were consistent with the original adjudication results and overall study findings. An updated study‐level meta‐analysis showed no overall significant risk for HHF with DPP‐4 inhibitors, but with statistical heterogeneity.