Background: There is a lack of studies where the outcomes of mitral paravalvular leak treatment were compared between surgery and catheter-based closure. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of re-do surgery with transapical catheter-based paravalvular leak closure.
Methods: This is a retrospective observational study at a single institution; 76 patients were included. According to the treatment, two groups were formed: the "Surgical" group (49 patients after re-do surgery) and the "Catheter" group (27 patients after transapical catheter-based treatment).
Results: In-hospital myocardial infarction 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.
Conclusions: 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.
Keywords: catheter-based closure; mitral paravalvular leak; mitral valve replacement.