Closing Mitral Paravalvular Leak: Comparing Catheter-based Transapical Option against Surgical Treatment Option

Fahim Shahid, Ibrar Rahman, Adan Khan Mughal, Muhammad Sibghat Ullah Khan
{"title":"Closing Mitral Paravalvular Leak: Comparing Catheter-based Transapical Option against Surgical Treatment Option","authors":"Fahim Shahid, Ibrar Rahman, Adan Khan Mughal, Muhammad Sibghat Ullah Khan","doi":"10.58425/jhmcs.v1i1.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The goal of this study was to compare the closure of catheter-based transapical option against surgical treatment option for mitral paravalvular leak.   \nMethodology: The study employed a retrospective observational study design to compare closure of mitral paravalvular leak using catheter-based transapical option and surgical treatment option. The study had a sample size of 76 patients who were grouped into surgical group or catheter group. The surgical group was allocated 49 patients after re-do surgery while the catheter group was allocated 27 patients after transapical catheter–based treatment. \nFindings: According to the study’s result, in-hospital myocardial necrosis occurred in 9 (18%) cases in the surgical group and none in the catheter group, p = 0.018. Procedure-related life-threatening bleeding occurred in 9 (18%) patients in the surgical group and none in the catheter group, p = 0.018. Nine (18%) patients died in 30 days in the surgical group, and none died in the catheter group, p = 0.039. A mean follow-up was 3.3 years. No difference was found between the groups by the degree of residual paravalvular regurgitation either at discharge or at follow-up. During the follow-up, 19 (39%) patients died in the surgical group and 2 (7%) among the catheter patients. \nConclusion: Transapical catheter-based closure of mitral paravalvular leak seems to be a safer treatment procedure than conventional re-do surgery, and the effectiveness of these procedures does not differ.","PeriodicalId":390791,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health, Medicine, and Clinical Studies","volume":"72 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health, Medicine, and Clinical Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58425/jhmcs.v1i1.19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The goal of this study was to compare the closure of catheter-based transapical option against surgical treatment option for mitral paravalvular leak.   Methodology: The study employed a retrospective observational study design to compare closure of mitral paravalvular leak using catheter-based transapical option and surgical treatment option. The study had a sample size of 76 patients who were grouped into surgical group or catheter group. The surgical group was allocated 49 patients after re-do surgery while the catheter group was allocated 27 patients after transapical catheter–based treatment. Findings: According to the study’s result, in-hospital myocardial necrosis occurred in 9 (18%) cases in the surgical group and none in the catheter group, p = 0.018. Procedure-related life-threatening bleeding occurred in 9 (18%) patients in the surgical group and none in the catheter group, p = 0.018. Nine (18%) patients died in 30 days in the surgical group, and none died in the catheter group, p = 0.039. A mean follow-up was 3.3 years. No difference was found between the groups by the degree of residual paravalvular regurgitation either at discharge or at follow-up. During the follow-up, 19 (39%) patients died in the surgical group and 2 (7%) among the catheter patients. Conclusion: Transapical catheter-based closure of mitral paravalvular leak seems to be a safer treatment procedure than conventional re-do surgery, and the effectiveness of these procedures does not differ.
关闭二尖瓣旁漏:导管为基础的经根尖治疗方案与手术治疗方案的比较
目的:本研究的目的是比较以导管为基础的经根尖闭合选择与手术治疗二尖瓣旁漏的选择。方法:本研究采用回顾性观察性研究设计,比较采用导管为基础的经根尖治疗方案和手术治疗方案封堵二尖瓣旁漏。本研究的样本量为76例,分为手术组和导管组。手术组49例经再次手术治疗,导管组27例经经根尖导管治疗。结果:研究结果显示,手术组9例(18%)发生院内心肌坏死,导管组0例(p = 0.018)。手术组有9例(18%)患者发生手术相关的危及生命的出血,导管组无一例(p = 0.018)。手术组30 d内死亡9例(18%),导管组无死亡(p = 0.039)。平均随访时间为3.3年。两组在出院时或随访时的瓣旁反流残余程度均无差异。随访期间,手术组死亡19例(39%),置管组死亡2例(7%)。结论:经根尖导管为基础的二尖瓣旁漏闭合术似乎是一种比传统的再做手术更安全的治疗方法,并且这些方法的有效性没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信