ArticleHealth science reports2024
Percutaneous versus surgical closure of paravalvular leaks in prosthetic valves: A cross-sectional comparison of clinical outcomes.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Amplatzer-Based Transcatheter Paravalvular Leak Closure: A Narrative Review of Device Design, Procedural Strategy, Safety, and Outcomes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of hemolysis in patients with prosthetic valve related paravalvular leaks.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2026Review
- Percutaneous versus surgical closure of paravalvular leaks in prosthetic valves: A cross-sectional comparison of clinical outcomes.Health science reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Paravalvular leak (PVL) is a serious complication of prosthetic valve replacement. Both surgical and percutaneous closure techniques are used for PVL closure, but optimal strategies and comparative outcomes are uncertain. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of percutaneous versus surgical PVL closure by analyzing changes in leak severity, functional status, echocardiographic parameters, and clinical outcomes. Methods: A total of 72 patients were included in this retrospective cross-sectional single-center study comparing percutaneous ( Results: Both percutaneous and surgical PVL closure significantly reduced leak severity and improved NYHA class (both Conclusion: Percutaneous and surgical PVL closure had similar efficacy in reducing leaks and improving symptoms, with no significant difference in early outcomes. Both options should be considered viable for PVL repair after heart team evaluation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.