Key result
Successful percutaneous mitral paravalvular leak closure (≤mild residual leak) was associated with significantly higher 3-year survival compared to >mild residual leak (61% vs 47%; P=0.002).
Why the study?
Does successful percutaneous mitral PVL closure (≤mild residual PVL) improve midterm survival compared to >mild residual PVL in patients undergoing percutaneous mitral PVL repair?
Cohort (n=231)
No
Does successful percutaneous mitral PVL closure (≤mild residual PVL) improve midterm survival compared to >mild residual PVL in patients undergoing percutaneous mitral PVL repair?
Absolute Event Rate: 61% vs 47%
p-value: p=0.002
Successful percutaneous reduction of mitral paravalvular leak to mild or less is associated with significantly improved midterm survival and lower rates of repeat surgical interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Successful PVL closure was associated with improved survival; leaves open need for prospective trials before changing practice.
Alkhouli et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in Prosthetic mitral valve paravalvular leak (n=231). Successful percutaneous PVL closure (≤mild residual PVL) vs. >mild residual PVL was evaluated on Survival at 3 years (p=0.002). Successful percutaneous mitral paravalvular leak closure (≤mild residual leak) was associated with significantly higher 3-year survival compared to >mild residual leak (61% vs 47%; P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: