Paravalvular Leak After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): Comparative Outcomes of Percutaneous Closure Techniques Versus Conservative Management – A Systematic Review
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes, hemodynamic efficacy, and long-term survival rates between percutaneous device closure and conservative management in patients with post-TAVI PVL.
Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series from major databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library). Primary endpoints included procedural success, all-cause mortality, heart failure rehospitalization, and echocardiographic parameters of regurgitation severity.
Results: Percutaneous closure demonstrated superior reduction in PVL severity (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.78–3.38, p < 0.001) and improved NYHA functional class compared to conservative management. However, procedural complications (e.g., device embolization, vascular injury) were non-negligible. Conservative therapy showed lower early morbidity but higher long-term heart failure recurrence.
Conclusions: Percutaneous closure techniques offer significant hemodynamic benefits in eligible patients, while conservative management may be reserved for high-risk cases. Individualized patient assessment is crucial in determining the optimal therapeutic approach.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. Iung B, Vahanian A. Epidemiology of valvular heart disease in the adult. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2011;8(3):162‐172.
II. Ogah OS, Davison BA, Sliwa K, et al. Gender differences in clinical characteristics and outcome of acute heart failure in sub‐saharan Africa: results of the THESUS‐HF study. Clin Res Cardiol. 2015;104(6):481‐490.
III. Matiasz R, Rigolin VH. 2017 focused update for management of patients with valvular heart disease: summary of new recommendations. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(1):e007596.
IV. Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease: developed by the task force for the management of valvular heart disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio‐Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2022;75(6):524.
V. Seery TJ, Slack MC. Percutaneous closure of a prosthetic pulmonary paravalvular leak. Congenit Heart Dis. 2014;9(1):E19‐22.
VI. Lampropoulos K, Aggeli C, Megalou A, Barbetseas J, Budts W. Diagnosis and treatment of left‐sided prosthetic paravalvular regurgitation. Cardiology. 2016;133(1):27‐34.
VII. Garg A, Azad S, Radhakrishnan S. Percutaneous paravalvular leak closure with their outcomes: a single center experience. Ann Card Anaesth. 2021;24:302‐307.
VIII. Pinheiro CP, Rezek D, Costa EP, et al. Paravalvular regurgitation: clinical outcomes in surgical and percutaneous treatments. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2016;107(1):55‐62.
IX. O'Rourke DJ, Palac RT, Malenka DJ, Marrin CAS, Arbuckle BE, Plehn JF. Outcome of mild periprosthetic regurgitation detected by intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38(1):163‐166.
X. Cappelli F, del Bene MR, Santoro G, Meucci F, Attanà P, Barletta G. The challenge of integrated echocardiographic approach in percutaneous closure of paravalvular leak. Echocardiography. 2011;28:E168‐E171.
XI. Singh P, Manda J, Hsiung MC, et al. Live/real time three‐dimensional transesophageal
echocardiographic evaluation of mitral and aortic valve prosthetic paravalvular regurgitation. Echocardiography. 2009;26:980‐987.
XII. Genereux P, Head SJ, Hahn R, et al. Paravalvular leak after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the new Achilles’ heel? A comprehensive review of the literature. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61(11):1125‐1136.
XIII. Helmy T, Kumar S, Khan AA, Raza A, Smart S, Bailey SR. Review of prosthetic paravalvular leaks: diagnosis and management. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2022;24(10):1287‐1297
XIV. Qamar F, Attar RH, Nabi F. Paravalvular leak. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2022;18(1):7‐9.