Outcomes of idiopathic chronic large pericardial effusion

Prognostic Nutritional Index as a Predictor of Recurrence in Patients Undergoing Pericardiocentesis: A Retrospective Analysis

Objective: Recurrence of pericardial effusion is possible despite the successful completion of pericardiocentesis and initiation of treatment. Predicting recurrence is important for determining treatment strategies. This study aimed to examine the factors that influence the recurrence of effusion in patients who had undergone pericardiocentesis. Method: A total of 113 patients with the evidence of tamponade or pericardial effusion over 10 mm were included in the study. The mean follow-up period was 49 months. Patients with and without recurrent effusion were divided into two groups. PNI calculation (PNI = 10 × serum albumin (g/dL) + 0.005 × total lymphocyte count (mm3) formula was used. Results: Recurrent pericardial effusion was observed in 30 patients during the follow-up period. There was no difference in age, gender, hypertension, LVEF%, hypertension, and appearance of fluid when the two groups were compared. There was a difference in PNI score and presence of malignancy between the two groups (p: 0.031 and 0.042, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression showed that malignancy and PNI score were independent predictors of recurrence in patients undergoing pericardiocentesis (p: 0.015 and p: 0.014, respectively). In the ROC analysis, PNI < 40.75 predicts recurrent pericardial effusion with 75% sensitivity and 58% specificity (AUC: 0.626, 95% CI: 0.509-0.742, and p=0.042). Conclusion: Predictors of recurrence in patients undergoing pericardiocentesis are important for patient follow-up. PNI is a simple and useful score that can be used to predict recurrent pericardial effusion.

Safety and Efficacy of Echo- vs. Fluoroscopy-Guided Pericardiocentesis in Cardiac Tamponade

Background and Objectives: Cardiac tamponade is managed through echo- or fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pericardiocentesis. The European Society of Cardiology's Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases proposed a triage strategy for these patients. This study evaluated the triage score and compared the safety and efficacy of fluoroscopy- versus echo-guided procedures without additional visualization control. Materials and Methods: This prospective observational study included 71 patients with cardiac tamponade from February 2021 to June 2022. Pericardiocentesis was performed using fluoroscopy or echo guidance based on clinical assessment and catheterization laboratory availability, without the additional control of needle/guidewire position or ECG monitoring. Patients were followed for three months. Results: The study included 71 patients (52.1% female, mean age 59.7 ± 15.7 years). Malignancy was the most common comorbidity (59.2%). Echo criteria led to urgent procedures in 47.9%, with subcostal access used most often (60.6%), particularly in fluoroscopy-guided procedures (93.8%, p = 0.003). The success rate was 97.1%, with minor complications in 14% of patients. Diabetes and malignancy predicted complications regardless of access site or guiding method. The triage score did not affect complication rates or short-term mortality. Conclusions: Fluoroscopy- and echo-guided pericardiocentesis without additional visualization control showed no difference in safety or efficacy. Delaying the procedure for patients with a triage score ≥6, or performing it early for those with a low score, did not impact complication rates or mortality, which were more influenced by the progression of the underlying disease.

Prevention of cardiac tamponade by left intercostal Pericardiotomy for massive recurrent pericardial effusion: a case report

This case involved an 89-year-old woman with a history of left nephrectomy for left renal cell carcinoma at the age of 87 years. She had been gradually accumulating pericardial effusion for the past 4 years. She presented with signs of tachycardia and hypotension suggestive of cardiac tamponade due to pericardial effusion, and pericardiocentesis was performed below the xiphoid process in the cardiology department. Serous fluid was aspirated, and malignancy was ruled out by various tests. The patient subsequently developed recurrent pericardial effusion and was admitted to the hospital. Cardiovascular surgery was performed for pericardial drainage. A left intercostal incision was made for pericardiotomy and drainage of the pericardial effusion, allowing it to accumulate in the left pleural cavity in case of future accumulation. Pathological examination of the pericardium revealed no specific findings, and no cancer cells were present in the pericardial fluid. Prednisolone therapy was initiated for idiopathic pericarditis.

Is pulmonary hypertension protective against cardiac tamponade? A systematic review

The presence of pulmonary hypertension (PH) may affect whether cardiac tamponade physiology develops from a pericardial effusion. Specifically, the increased intracardiac pressure and right ventricular hypertrophy associated with PH would seemingly increase the intrapericardial pressure threshold at which the right-sided chambers collapse. In this systematic review, we examined the impact of PH on the incidence, in-hospital and long-term mortality, and echocardiographic findings of patients with cardiac tamponade. Using the PRISMA guideline, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Academic Search Premier, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Database for studies investigating PH and cardiac tamponade. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to analyze the quality of returned studies. Primary outcomes included the incidence of cardiac tamponade, as well as in-hospital and long-term mortality rates. Secondary outcomes were the presence or absence of echocardiographic findings of cardiac tamponade in patients with PH. Forty-three studies (9 cohort studies and 34 case reports) with 1054 patients were included. The incidence of cardiac tamponade was significantly higher in patients with PH compared to those without PH, 2.0% (95% CI 1.2-3.2%) vs. 0.05% (95% CI 0.05-0.05%), p < 0.0001, OR 40.76 (95% CI 24.8-66.9). The incidence of tamponade in patients with a known pericardial effusion was similar in those with and without PH, 20.3% (95% CI 12.0-32.3%) and 20.9% (95% CI 18.0-24.1%), p = 0.9267, OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.50-1.87). In patients with tamponade, those with PH demonstrated a significantly higher in-hospital mortality than those without PH, 38.8% (95% CI 26.4-52.8%) vs. 14.4% (95% CI 14.2-14.6%), p < 0.0001, OR 3.77 (95% CI 2.12-6.70). Long-term mortality in patients with tamponade was significantly lower in those with PH than in those without PH, 45.5% (95% CI 33.0-58.5%) vs. 59.1% (95% CI 54.7-63.4%), p = 0.0258, OR 0.576 (95% CI 0.33-1.01). However, after stratifying by non-malignant etiologies, the long-term mortality benefit for those with PH disappeared. In the studies that described specific echocardiographic findings of cardiac tamponade, only 10.5% of patients with PH and tamponade showed right atrial and right ventricular collapse. When evaluating patients with pericardial effusions, physicians must recognize the effects of underlying PH on the incidence, in-hospital and long-term mortality rates, and potentially atypical echocardiographic presentation of cardiac tamponade.

Key Articles and Guidelines in the Management of Pericardial Syndromes

Over the past two decades, emerging literature has shaped the management of pericardial syndromes and has evolved abundantly towards the creation of European guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases. However, since the publication of the European guidelines in 2015, more data surrounding the management of pericardial syndromes have been published. Comprehensive reference materials with the most updated literature are warranted and can be pivotal in helping pharmacists make evidence-based and clinical decisions for patients diagnosed with pericardial syndromes. This compilation of key articles and guidelines will serve as a resource for pharmacists who are responsible for the care of patients with pericardial syndromes.

Post-cardiac injury syndrome and pericardial effusion recurrence after pericardial effusion drainage in chronic idiopathic pericardial effusion

INTRODUCTION

The management of even large pericardial effusions in asymptomatic patients is still a matter of debate. Aim of the present study is to explore, in a multicenter setting, the rate of post-cardiac injury syndromes (PCIS) and pericardial effusion recurrence after pericardial effusion drainage procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a multicenter international retrospective study including a consecutive cohort of patients diagnosed with large, chronic and idiopathic pericardial effusions, prospectively evaluated from January 2003 to December 2021 who underwent a clinically indicated pericardial drainage procedure. Two separate end-points were recorded: 1) recurrence of pericardial effusion after drainage without any sign of pericardial inflammation 2) occurrence of PCIS, defined as the new onset of pericarditis 1 to 6 weeks after pericardial intervention.

RESULTS

124 patients were enrolled (50 % female, mean age 64 years old). A mean follow-up of 29.6 ± 25.6 months was obtained in 110 patients (88 %). 110 patients were treated with pericardiocentesis (89 %), 25 with pleuro-pericardial windows (20 %), and 1 with pericardiectomy (1 %). PCIS occurred in 21 out of 124 patients followed for at least 6 weeks (16.9%). Recurrence of pericardial effusion after drainage without any sign of pericardial inflammation occurred in 68 out of 110 patients at a longer follow-up (61.8 %). At multivariate analysis only inflammatory cells in pericardial fluid was associated with PCIS and pericardiocentesis with pericardial effusion recurrency.

CONCLUSION

Our data support the need of caution with the use of pericardiocentesis in asymptomatic patients with large pericardial effusion as it is often associated with pericardial effusion recurrence. Of interest the presence of inflammatory cells in the pericardial fluid is associated with PCIS after pericardial drainage procedures.

Epidemiological characteristics, etiological spectrum, and outcomes of adult patients with pericardial effusion at a Teaching Hospital in Somalia

Background

Pericardial effusion (PE) is an abnormal fluid volume in the pericardial space and is a common clinical entity. The incidence of PE is estimated diversely and depends on risk factors, etiologies, and geographic locations.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the clinical characteristics, etiologic spectrum, echocardiographic features, and outcomes among patients with different types of PE.

Method

This retrospective observational study included 93 patients with confirmed PE. Their medical records were reviewed in the hospital information system of Mogadishu Somali Turkish Training and Research Hospital between April 2022 and September 2022. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, chest X-rays, echocardiography, laboratory findings, management approaches, and outcome reports were reviewed and recorded.

Results

Out of the 3000 participants, 3.1% (n = 93/3000) met the definition of definitive PE. In this study, we included 51 females and 42 males. Among the patients, 86% (n = 80) had at least one comorbidity, with diabetes (38.7%) and hypertension (37.6%) being the most common. The most frequently reported clinical presentation findings were shortness of breath (67.7%), chest pain (49.4%), cough (47.3%), and palpitations (47.3%). Cardiac tamponade developed in 9.7% (n = 9) of the patients. Pericardial taps were performed in 64.5% of the cases. Our analysis showed that the most common cause of PE was cardiac disease (n = 33, 35.4%), followed by tuberculosis (TB) (n = 25, 26.8%), uremic pericarditis (n = 24, 25.8%), and hypothyroidism (n = 10, 10.7%). Regarding the severity of PE based on echocardiographic findings, nearly half of the patients (n = 46, 49.4%) had mild PE, whereas 26.8% (n = 25) had moderate PE, and 23.6% (n = 22) had severe PE. Two-thirds of the cases (66.6%) were managed with furosemide, 48 (51.6%) patients were treated with an anti-inflammatory, hemodialysis was performed in 24 (25.8%) patients and antituberculous medications were administered to 7 (7.5%) patients. Out of the 93 patients, 24 (25.8%) died during the hospital stay. It was determined that the mortality risk of patients with renal failure was 7.518 times higher than those without (p = 0.004), and the risk for those with TB was 5.554 times higher than those without (p = 0.011). Other variables were not influential on mortality (p > 0.050).

Conclusion

Our study results demonstrate the epidemiological profile of PE in Somalia. The leading causes of PE were cardiac diseases, uremic pericarditis, TB, and hypothyroidism. PE is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in Somalia, especially in individuals with renal failure and TB infection.

Pericardial Effusion and Cardiac Tamponade Pathophysiology and New Approaches to Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this manuscript is to examine up-to-date approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of pericardial effusions and cardiac tamponade.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent recommendations from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Society of Cardiology have improved our management of the patient with pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade, but significant knowledge gaps remain. Novel diagnostic and triage strategies have been suggested, and recent information have improved our facility to assess the presence and size of a pericardial effusion, assess its hemodynamic impact, and determine its cause. Despite these recent findings, there is a scarcity of evidence-based data to direct the management of pericardial effusion and cardiac tamponade. While the first-line function of echocardiography in managing these disorders is undisputed, there are increasingly niche functions for multimodality imaging.

Prevalence, Risk Factors, Prognosis, and Management of Pericardial Effusion in COVID-19

Background: There is limited data in the literature about the clinical importance and prognosis of pericardial effusion (PE) in patients discharged after recovering from COVID-19, but large-scale studies have yet to be available. This study investigated the prevalence, risk factors, prognosis, late clinical outcomes, and management of PE in COVID-19. Materials and Methods: Between August 2020 and March 2021, 15,689 patients were followed up in our pandemic hospital due to COVID-19. Patients with positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results and PE associated with COVID-19 in computed tomography (CT) were included in the study. The patients were divided into three groups according to PE size (mild, moderate, and large). Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) records, laboratory data, clinical outcomes, and medical treatments of patients discharged from the hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Results: According to the PE size (mild, moderate, large) of 256 patients with PE at admission or discharge, the mean age was 62.17 ± 16.34, 69.12 ± 12.52, and 72.44 ± 15.26, respectively. The mean follow-up period of the patients was 25.2 ± 5.12 months. Of the patients in the study population, 53.5% were in the mild group, 30.4% in the moderate group, and 16.1% in the large group. PE became chronic in a total of 178 (69.6%) patients at the end of the mean three months, and chronicity increased as PE size increased. Despite the different anti-inflammatory treatments for PE in the acute phase, similar chronicity was observed. In addition, as the PE size increased, the patients' frequency of hospitalization, complications, and mortality rates showed statistical significance between the groups. Conclusions: The clinical prognosis of patients presenting with PE was quite poor; as PE in size increased, cardiac and noncardiac events and mortality rates were significantly higher. Patients with large PE associated with COVID-19 at discharge should be monitored at close intervals due to the chronicity of PE and the increased risk of tamponade.

Chronic Pericardial Effusion: Causes and Management

Chronic pericardial effusion is a common pericardial syndrome whose approach has been well standardised in recent years. The main challenge associated with this condition is the progression (sometimes unheralded) to cardiac tamponade. Pericardial effusions may present either as an isolated finding or in the context of a specific etiology including autoimmune, neoplastic, or metabolic disease. Among investigations used during diagnostic work-up, echocardiography is of paramount importance for the diagnosis, sizing, and serial evaluation of the hemodynamic impact of effusions on heart diastolic function. In an individualised manner, advanced imaging including computed tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging should be performed, especially if baseline tests are inconclusive. Triage of these patients according to the most recent 2015 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases should take into account the presence of hemodynamic compromise as well as suspicion of malignant or purulent pericarditis as first step, C-reactive protein serum level measurement as second step, investigations for a specific condition known to be associated with pericardial effusion as third step, and finally the size and the duration of the effusion. Treatment depends on the evaluation of the above-mentioned parameters and should ideally be tailored to the individual patient. Prognosis of chronic pericardial effusions depends largely on the underlying etiology. According to novel data, the prognosis of individuals with idiopathic, chronic (> 3 months), large (> 2 cm), asymptomatic pericardial effusions is usually benign and a watchful waiting strategy seems more reasonable and cost-effective than routine drainage as previously recommended.

The Contemporary Role of Cardiac Computed Tomography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis and Management of Pericardial Diseases

Pericardial syndromes encompass different clinical conditions from acute pericarditis to idiopathic chronic pericardial effusion. Transthoracic echocardiography is the first and most important initial diagnostic imaging modality in most patients affected by pericardial disease. However, cardiac computed tomography (CCT) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) have recently gained a pivotal role in cardiology, and recent reports have supported the role of both of these advanced techniques in the evaluation and guiding therapy of pericardial disease. Most promising is the capability of CMR to identify the presence of pericardial inflammation, carrying both diagnostic and prognostic value in the setting of recurrent and chronic pericarditis. In addition, CCT permits accurate evaluation of the presence and extension of pericardial calcification, providing important information in confirming the diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis and during the preprocedural planning for patients undergoing pericardiectomy. Both CCT and CMR require specific expertise, especially for the evaluation of pericardial disease. The aim of the present review is to provide physicians an updated overview of CCT and CMR in pericardial disease, focusing on technical issues, recent research findings, and potential clinical applications.

Cardiac tamponade

Cardiac tamponade is a medical emergency caused by the progressive accumulation of pericardial fluid (effusion), blood, pus or air in the pericardium, compressing the heart chambers and leading to haemodynamic compromise, circulatory shock, cardiac arrest and death. Pericardial diseases of any aetiology as well as complications of interventional and surgical procedures or chest trauma can cause cardiac tamponade. Tamponade can be precipitated in patients with pericardial effusion by dehydration or exposure to certain medications, particularly vasodilators or intravenous diuretics. Key clinical findings in patients with cardiac tamponade are hypotension, increased jugular venous pressure and distant heart sounds (Beck triad). Dyspnoea can progress to orthopnoea (with no rales on lung auscultation) accompanied by weakness, fatigue, tachycardia and oliguria. In tamponade caused by acute pericarditis, the patient can experience fever and typical chest pain increasing on inspiration and radiating to the trapezius ridge. Generally, cardiac tamponade is a clinical diagnosis that can be confirmed using various imaging modalities, principally echocardiography. Cardiac tamponade is preferably resolved by echocardiography-guided pericardiocentesis. In patients who have recently undergone cardiac surgery and in those with neoplastic infiltration, effusive-constrictive pericarditis, or loculated effusions, fluoroscopic guidance can increase the feasibility and safety of the procedure. Surgical management is indicated in patients with aortic dissection, chest trauma, bleeding or purulent infection that cannot be controlled percutaneously. After pericardiocentesis or pericardiotomy, NSAIDs and colchicine can be considered to prevent recurrence and effusive-constrictive pericarditis.

Pericardial Fluid Analysis in Diagnosis and Prognosis of Patients Who Underwent Pericardiocentesis

In this study, we aimed to examine the diagnostic yield of pericardial fluid biochemistry and cytology and their prognostic significance in patients with percutaneously drained pericardial effusions, with and without malignancy. This is a single-center, retrospective study of patients who underwent pericardiocentesis between 2010 and 2020. Data were extracted from electronic patient records, including procedural information, underlying diagnosis, and laboratory results. Patients were grouped into those with and without underlying malignancy. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the association of variables with mortality. The study included 179 patients; 50% had an underlying malignancy. There were no significant differences in pericardial fluid protein and lactate dehydrogenase between the 2 groups. Diagnostic yield from pericardial fluid analysis was greater in the malignant group (32% vs 11%, p = 0.002); 72% of newly diagnosed malignancies had positive fluid cytology. The 1-year survival was 86% and 33% in nonmalignant and malignant groups, respectively (p <0.001). Of 17 patients who died within the nonmalignant group, idiopathic effusions were the largest group (n = 6). In malignancy, lower pericardial fluid protein and higher serum C-reactive protein were associated with increased risk of mortality. In conclusion, pericardial fluid biochemistry has limited value in determining the etiology of pericardial effusions; fluid cytology is the most important diagnostic test. Mortality in malignant pericardial effusions may be associated with lower pericardial fluid protein levels and a higher serum C-reactive protein. Nonmalignant pericardial effusions do not have a benign prognosis and close follow-up is required.

Chronic pericardial effusion: current concepts and emerging trends

INTRODUCTION

Pericardial effusion (PEF) is a common and challenging pericardial syndrome with a variety of clinical manifestations ranging from asymptomatic, incidentally uncovered small PEFs, to life-threatening cardiac tamponade.

AREAS COVERED

: This review focuses on the pathophysiology, epidemiology, etiology, classification, clinical findings, diagnostic work-up, management and outcome of PEFs. Particular emphasis has been given on the most recent evidence concerning the contribution of imaging for the detection, differential diagnosis and evaluation of the hemodynamic impact of PEFs on the diastolic filling of the heart. Moreover, simplified algorithms for PEF triage and management have been included.

EXPERT OPINION

The management of patients with PEFs is mainly based on four parameters namely hemodynamic impact on diastolic function, elevation of inflammatory markers, presence of a specific underlying condition known to be associated with PEF and finally size and duration of the effusion. Novel data have contributed to change our view towards large, asymptomatic, "idiopathic" PEFs and dictated a rather conservative approach in most cases. It is also stressed that there is a compelling need for additional research, which is essential for tailored treatments aiming at the improvement of quality of life and containment of health care costs.

Immunomodulating Therapies in Acute Myocarditis and Recurrent/Acute Pericarditis

The field of inflammatory disease of the heart or "cardio-immunology" is rapidly evolving due to the wider use of non-invasive diagnostic tools able to detect and monitor myocardial inflammation. In acute myocarditis, recent data on the use of immunomodulating therapies have been reported both in the setting of systemic autoimmune disorders and in the setting of isolated forms, especially in patients with specific histology (e.g., eosinophilic myocarditis) or with an arrhythmicburden. A role for immunosuppressive therapies has been also shown in severe cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a condition that can be associated with cardiac injury and acute myocarditis. Furthermore, ongoing clinical trials are assessing the role of high dosage methylprednisolone in the context of acute myocarditis complicated by heart failure or fulminant presentation or the role of anakinra to treat patients with acute myocarditis excluding patients with hemodynamically unstable conditions. In addition, the explosion of immune-mediated therapies in oncology has introduced new pathophysiological entities, such as immune-checkpoint inhibitor-associated myocarditis and new basic research models to understand the interaction between the cardiac and immune systems. Here we provide a broad overview of evolving areas in cardio-immunology. We summarize the use of new imaging tools in combination with endomyocardial biopsy and laboratory parameters such as high sensitivity troponin to monitor the response to immunomodulating therapies based on recent evidence and clinical experience. Concerning pericarditis, the normal composition of pericardial fluid has been recently elucidated, allowing to assess the actual presence of inflammation; indeed, normal pericardial fluid is rich in nucleated cells, protein, albumin, LDH, at levels consistent with inflammatory exudates in other biological fluids. Importantly, recent findings showed how innate immunity plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of recurrent pericarditis with raised C-reactive protein, with inflammasome and IL-1 overproduction as drivers for systemic inflammatory response. In the era of tailored medicine, anti-IL-1 agents such as anakinra and rilonacept have been demonstrated highly effective in patients with recurrent pericarditis associated with an inflammatory phenotype.

Recent advances in pericarditis

Pericardial diseases are an heterogeneous group of entities, ranging from acute pericarditis to asymptomatic pericardial effusions. New advances in understanding the processes underlying them have been made. In 2020 a prospective study defined the reference intervals of the component of normal pericardial fluid, that was found to be rich in nucleated cells, proteins, albumin and LDH, at levels compatible with the inflammatory exudates of other biological fluids such as pleural or peritoneal fluid; Light's criteria should not be used to evaluate it. Recently we also analyzed systematically large chronic idiopathic non-inflammatory pericardial effusions, observing that a non-invasive wait-and-see approach may be the best choice in clinical practice in oligosymptomatic cases. Concerning acute recurrent pericarditis (RP), an innovative interaction between cardiologists, internists and pediatric rheumatologists led to the intuition of a pivotal role of IL-1 in recurrent pericarditis characterized by an evident inflammatory recurrent phenotype, and recent data have shown the striking efficacy of anakinra and rilonacept in these patients. The proper selection of the patient is important; the ideal candidate for anti-IL-1 therapy is the patient with RP with high levels of serum C-reactive protein, high fever, neutrophil leukocitosis, pleuropulmonary involvement, frequent exacerbations and resistant to conventional therapy. On the contrary, anti-IL-1 drugs are not indicated in patients with pericardial effusion whose cause is not attributable to inflammatory phenomena. Finally, many patients with RP are women of childbearing age, and the possibility for these women to become pregnant must be addressed by multidisciplinary teams.

Prevalence and prognosis of pericardial effusion in patients affected by pectus excavatum: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

The presence of pectus excavatum(PEX) has been occasionally associated with pericardial effusion. Aim of the present study was to compare incidence and prognosis of pericardial effusion in a group of unselected patients with PEX vs a control group.

METHODS

From a prospective registry of consecutive patients who underwent chest CT for cardiovascular disease, subjects with a radiological diagnosis of PEX were retrospectively identified (cases); from the same registry patients (controls) without rib cage abnormalities were randomly selected, until a 1:2 ratio was reached. The presence of pericardial effusion at CT was quantified. Follow-up was obtained for a composite end-point: cardiac tamponade, need for pericardiocentesis, need for cardiac surgery for relapsing pericardial effusion.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients with PEX (20 females) and a control group of 86 cases (31 females) without rib cage abnormalities were identified. Pericardial effusion evaluated at CT was significatively more prevalent in patients with PEX vs control group, 37.2% vs 13.9% (p < 0.001), respectively; four patients with PEX (9.3%) had at least moderate pericardial effusion vs no subjects among the controls (p = 0.004). PEX diagnosis was significantly associated to pericardial effusion at multi-variate analysis (OR95%CI 10.91[3.47-34.29], p < 0.001). At a mean follow-up of 6.5 ± 3.4 years no pericardial events were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the higher prevalence of pericardial effusion in patients with PEX when compared to a control group. The absence of adverse pericardial events at follow-up suggest the good prognosis of these effusions, that in the appropriate clinical setting might not be considered "idiopathic".

Contemporary management of pericardial effusion

Pericardial effusion is a relatively common clinical condition with a variety of clinical manifestations ranging from incidentally discovered asymptomatic cases to life-threatening cardiac tamponade. The etiology encompasses idiopathic cases and forms secondary to different conditions, including autoimmune diseases, malignancies, metabolic disorders, etc. While medical therapy should be offered to patients with elevation of inflammatory markers, in specific forms treatment should be appropriate to the underlying disorder. In cases with hemodynamic compromise pericardial drainage either with pericardiocentesis or pericardial "window" is indicated for therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. In the remainder, factors like comorbidities, size and location of the pericardial effusion will influence the clinical decision making. In asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic chronic large idiopathic pericardial effusions, according to recent evidence, a conservative approach with watchful waiting seems the most reasonable option. The prognosis of pericardial effusions largely depends on the underlying etiologies. Metastatic spread to the pericardium has an ominous prognosis whereas large to moderate effusions have been often associated with known or newly discovered specific underlying causes. Chronic small idiopathic effusions have an excellent prognosis and do not require specific monitoring. Large chronic idiopathic effusions in clinically stable patients require a 3 to 6-month assessment ideally in a specialized unit.

Empirical anti-tuberculous therapy for the massive pericardial effusion of unknown etiology

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of empirical anti-tuberculous therapy (ATT) in patients with massive pericardial effusion (MPE) of unknown etiology in China.

METHODS

In-hospital patients with MPE were assessed retrospectively. Based on thorough examination excluding neoplastic, autoimmune, and non-tuberculous infectious diseases, patients who had no evidence of tuberculosis (TB) were treated with empirical ATT (Group A) or not treated with empirical ATT (Group C), whereas those who had evidence of TB were treated with standard ATT (Group B). Clinical outcomes and mitigation of MPE were compared among the three groups to identify the effectiveness of ATT. The survival free of composite endpoint was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 185 eligible patients were recruited: 77 in Group A, 80 in Group B, and 28 in Group C. The average follow-up was 52.9 ± 30.7, 49.4 ± 29.7, and 51.8 ± 30.2 months for Groups A, B, and C, respectively. The incidence of composite endpoint was 23.3, 24.4, and 85.7% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively (p < .0001). However, the clinical recovery rate was greater in Group B compared with Group A (p = .027). No significant difference in the safety profile of ATT was noted between Groups A and B. MPE did not spontaneously decrease in 85.7% of patients in Group C.

CONCLUSIONS

Empirical ATT should be considered in MPE of unknown etiology in countries with a high burden of TB.

Pericarditis and pericardial effusion: one or two distinct diseases?

The main pericardial syndromes include acute and recurrent pericarditis, constrictive pericarditis and chronic pericardial effusion in the absence of overt inflammation. Despite recent advances in pericardial syndromes, certain clinical scenarios depict remarkable peculiarities and their management is often challenging for the clinician. Acute pericarditis is the most common pericardial disease and in most instances is accompanied by pericardial effusion. On the other hand, pericardial effusion may appear as a separate clinical entity occasionally characterized by absence of inflammatory markers elevation. In cases that effusions are accompanied by C-reactive protein (CRP) elevation, the administration of empiric anti-inflammatory treatment as in acute pericarditis, is the guidelines recommended approach. Conversely, the optimal management of patients with pericardial effusions in the absence of clinical or subclinical inflammation (as depicted by CRP levels and cardiac magnetic resonance findings), is not supported by solid evidence. Patients with chronic pericardial effusions should be followed in specialized centers according to tailored timelines, based on the specific clinical scenarios which should take into account etiology, effusion size, disease duration and stability as regards symptoms and effusion volume. Patients should also be advised to seek medical care at any time if symptoms like chest pain, dyspnea and fatigue should appear.

New Approaches to Management of Pericardial Effusions

Purpose of Review

Pericardial effusion is a challenging pericardial syndrome and a cause of serious concern for physicians and patients due to its potential progression to life-threatening cardiac tamponade. In this review, we summarize the contemporary evidence of the etiology; diagnostic work-up, with particular emphasis on the contribution of multimodality imaging; therapeutic options; and short- and long-term outcomes of these patients.

Recent Findings

In recent years, an important piece of information has contributed to put together several missing parts of the puzzle of pericardial effusion. The most recent 2015 guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases are a valuable aid for a tailored approach to this condition. Actually, current guidelines suggest a 4-step treatment algorithm depending on the presence or absence of hemodynamic impairment; the elevation of inflammatory markers; the presence of a known or first-diagnosed underlying condition, possibly related to pericardial effusion; and finally the duration and size of the effusion. In contrast to earlier perceptions, based on the most recent evidence, it seems that in the subgroup of asymptomatic patients with large (> 2-cm end-diastolic diameter), chronic (> 3 months) C-reactive protein negative, idiopathic (without an apparent cause) pericardial effusion, a conservative approach is the most reasonable option.

Summary

At present there is an increasing interest in the pericardial syndromes in general and pericardial effusions in specific, which has consistently expanded our knowledge in this “hazy landscape.” Apart from general recommendations applied to all cases, an individualized, etiologically driven treatment is of paramount importance.

Fifteen-year experience with pericardiectomy at a tertiary referral center

Purpose

Pericardiectomy has traditionally carried relatively high perioperative mortality and morbidity, with few published reports of intermediate- and long- term outcomes. We investigated our 15-year experience performing pericardiectomy at our institution.

Methods

Retrospective study of all patients who underwent pericardiectomy at our institution between 2005 and 2019. Baseline demographics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes including long-term survival were analyzed.

Results

Sixty-three patients were included in the study. 66.7% of subjects underwent isolated pericardiectomy while 33.3% underwent pericardiectomy concomitantly with another cardiac surgical procedure. The most common indications for pericardiectomy were constrictive (79.4%) and hemorrhagic (9.5%) pericarditis. Preoperatively, 76.2% of patients were New York Heart Association class II and III, while postoperatively, 71.4% were class I and II. One-, three-, five-, and ten- year overall mortality was 9.5, 14.3, 20.6, and 25.4%, respectively. Overall pericarditis recurrence rate was 4.8%.

Conclusion

Pericardiectomy carries relatively high overall mortality rates, which likely reflects underlying disease etiology and comorbidities. Patients with prior cardiac intervention, history of dialysis, and immunocompromised state are associated with worse outcomes.

Cardiac tamponade: an educational review

Cardiac tamponade is a pericardial syndrome characterised by an impairment of the diastolic filling of the ventricles causing reduction of cardiac output, usually producing signs and symptoms of cardiac arrest, if untreated. The main causes of cardiac tamponade include percutaneous cardiac interventions, malignacies, infectious/inflammatory causes, mechanical complications of myocardial infarction and aortic dissection. The diagnosis of cardiac tamponade is a clinical diagnosis based on a suggestive history and clinical presentation with worsening dyspnoea, distended jugular veins, muffled heart sounds and pulsus paradoxus, and should be confirmed by echocardiography. Cardiac tamponade is a life-threatening syndrome that requires urgent treatment by pericardiocentesis. Pericardiocentesis is an interventional technique to drain pericardial fluid by a percutaneous route. The standard technique for pericardiocentesis is guided by echocardiography or fluoroscopy under local anaesthesia. Pericardiocentesis should be performed by experienced operators and carries a variable risk of complications, mainly cardiac chamber puncture, arrhythmias (ventricular arrhythmias suggest puncture of the ventricle), coronary artery puncture or haemothorax, pneumothorax, pneumopericardium and hepatic injury. The prognosis of cardiac tamponade is essentially related to aetiology. Cardiac tamponade in patients with cancer and metastatic involvement of the pericardium has a bad short-term prognosis because it is a sign of advanced cancer, on the contrary, patients with cardiac tamponade and a final diagnosis of idiopathic pericarditis generally have a good long-term prognosis.

Chronic massive pericardial effusion: a case report and literature review

Chronic massive pericardial effusion without cardiac tamponade is relatively rare. Nearly half of all patients with chronic large pericardial effusion are asymptomatic. We report a case of a 77-year-old man who presented with an asymptomatic chronic massive pericardial effusion, with no evidence of cardiac tamponade or pericardial constriction during a 10-year follow-up. The patient had a complex history of lymph node tuberculosis, hypertension, hypothyroidism, and polycythemia vera, as well as high-dose ³¹P radiation exposure 45 years ago. There was no evidence of tuberculosis infection, hypothyroidism, malignant tumor, severe heart failure, uremia, trauma, severe bacterial or fungal infection, chronic myeloid leukemia, or bone marrow fibrosis after admission. The patient underwent pericardiocentesis twice. The pericardial effusion comprised exudate fluid with a high proportion of monocytes. The patient refused indwelling catheter drainage or pericardiectomy. The likely final diagnosis was recurrent chronic large idiopathic pericardial effusion.

Prevalence and Outcomes of Pericardial Effusion in Kidney Transplant Candidates

Pericardial disease is a recognized manifestation of cardiovascular disease in the end-stage renal disease (ESRD) population, and can manifest as pericardial effusion, though the prognosis of pericardial disease in ESRD patients is unclear. In the modern era of renal replacement therapy, little is known about the prevalence and the implications of pericardial effusion in ESRD patients, its echocardiographic characteristics, and risk factors. We conducted a retrospective chart review on subjects > than 18 years of age with known ESRD who were undergoing outpatient evaluation for renal transplantation at Mayo Clinic Arizona between January 2001 and December 2015 and had baseline echocardiogram completed within 3 months of their initial evaluation. Patients with moderate sized pericardial effusions or larger were identified. The pericardial effusion cohort was age and gender matched with a cohort of patients with ESRD without pericardial effusion in a 1:2 fashion. 54 patients with moderate or greater sized pericardial effusion out of 2,820 patients that fit our inclusion criteria, corresponding to a prevalence of 1.9%. A total of 41 patients or 75.9%, had a moderate sized effusion. A total of 13 patients, or 24.1% had a large sized effusion, 7 of whom had tamponade physiology on echocardiography. The presence and size of the effusion was not predictive for worse outcomes. Hemodialysis duration was protective, but no other factors were predictive or protective in the development of moderate sized or larger pericardial effusions, including echocardiographic parameters.

Long-Term Outcome of Pericardial Drainage in Cases of Chronic, Large, Hemodynamically Insignificant, C-Reactive Protein Negative, Idiopathic Pericardial Effusions

Pericardial effusion (PE) prognosis depends on the underlying etiology. We sought to assess the outcome of patients with chronic (>3 months), large (diastolic echo-free space >2 cm), idiopathic (without apparent etiology), C-reactive protein (CRP) negative PE, a topic where data are lacking. A total of n = 74 patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were treated by pericardiocentesis (n = 39) or surgical pericardial "window" (PW) (n = 13) or conservatively (n = 22). The median follow-up was 24 months (interquartile range: 15 to 38). Among those patients who had PE drained (n = 52), PE re-accumulation occurred in 32 cases (61.5%) and the rate was significantly higher in the pericardiocentesis subgroup (76.9% for pericardiocentesis vs 15.4% for PW group, p <0.001). Patients with re-accumulation had longer disease duration (32.1 ± 25.7 months vs 19.5 ± 23.8 months, p = 0.01), higher maximum PE diameter (32.2 ± 9.4 mm vs 26.1 ± 4.9 mm, p = 0.003) and larger PE volume drained at baseline (1,912 ± 707 mL vs 1,508 ± 387 mL, p = 0.04). Large PE re-accumulation occurred in 41% of patients who underwent pericardiocentesis and in 7.7% of those who underwent PW. In Cox survival analysis the only independent predictor of fluid re-accumulation was the type of intervention, with PW being associated with significantly reduced risk (hazard ratio 0.115, 95% confidence interval 0.015 to 0.875, p = 0.037). Major complications needing treatment were recorded in 12.8% and 15.4% (p = 0.999) of patients who underwent pericardiocentesis and PW, respectively. Moreover, invasive procedures were not helpful in establishing new diagnoses and guide treatment. In conclusion, in asymptomatic patients with chronic, large, hemodynamically insignificant, CRP negative, idiopathic PE, conservative management seems a more reasonable approach in most cases.

CMR in Pericardial Diseases - an Update

Purpose of Review

To review the latest developments and the current role of the cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) in pericardial diseases and their complications.

Recent Findings

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) has the ability to incorporate anatomy, physiology, and “virtual histology” strategies to achieve the most accurate diagnosis for even the most demanding, pericardial diseases.

Summary

Acute, chronic, recurrent, and constrictive pericarditis as well as pericarditis related complications, pericardial masses and congenital pericardial defects are commonly encountered in clinical practice with relatively significant morbidity and mortality. Owing to the challenging diagnosis, CMR imaging is often employed in confirming the diagnosis and elucidating the underling pathophysiology. In this review we outline the common CMR techniques and their expected diagnostic outcomes.