Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion

Case report: Successful treatment of malignant pericardial effusion with pericardiocentesis, concurrent anti-inflammatory therapy and cancer therapy

Despite significant advancements in systemic anticancer therapies, cardiac tamponade remains a serious and potentially life-threatening complication in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, there is a paucity of comprehensive research investigating alternative management approaches, such as pericardiocentesis and anti-inflammatory therapy (AIT), to effectively address cardiac tamponade and mitigate the risk of heart failure arising from constrictive physiology (CP) in patients with MBC when traditional systemic anticancer drugs fail to yield favorable outcomes. Herein, we describe two cases of MBC with cardiac tamponade that occurred despite the administration of effective systemic anticancer drugs. In each case, pericardial effusion was detected in a patient who was undergoing palliative anticancer therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive MBC. The patients in these cases were successfully treated with pericardiocentesis and AIT (prednisolone and colchicine) for subsequent CP without substitution with their systemic anticancer drugs. Cardiac tamponade and CP are regarded as signs of advanced cancer and are associated with a worse clinical outcome in general; however, they can still be treated with an effective anticancer drug, pericardiocentesis, and management of CP by cardiooncology specialists.

Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Cancer Patients Who Developed Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify the characteristics and clinical outcomes of cancer patients who developed constrictive physiology (CP) after percutaneous pericardiocentesis.

METHODS

One-hundred thirty-three cancer patients who underwent pericardiocentesis were divided into 2 groups according to follow-up echocardiography (CP vs. non-CP). The clinical history, imaging findings, and laboratory results, and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

CP developed in 49 (36.8%) patients after pericardiocentesis. The CP group had a more frequent history of radiation therapy. Pericardial enhancement and malignant masses abutting the pericardium were more frequently observed in the CP group. Fever and ST segment elevation were more frequent in the CP group, with higher C-reactive protein levels (6.6±4.3mg/dL vs. 3.3±2.5mg/dL, p<0.001). Pericardial fluid leukocytes counts were significantly higher, and positive cytology was more frequent in the CP group. In baseline echocardiography before pericardiocentesis, medial e' velocity was significantly higher in the CP group (8.6±2.1cm/s vs. 6.5±2.3cm/s, p<0.001), and respirophasic ventricular septal shift, prominent expiratory hepatic venous flow reversal, pericardial adhesion, and loculated pericardial fluid were also more frequent. The risk of all-cause death was significantly high in the CP group (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval,1.10-2.13; p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

CP frequently develops after pericardiocentesis, and it is associated with poor survival in cancer patients. Several clinical signs, imaging, and laboratory findings suggestive of pericardial inflammation and/or direct malignant pericardial invasion are frequently observed and could be used as predictors of CP development.

The effect of colchicine on the echocardiographic constrictive physiology after coronary artery bypass graft surgery

BACKGROUND

Constrictive physiology is a transitory condition that could lead to constrictive pericarditis, which is a rare complication after open-heart surgery. Anti-inflammatory drugs like colchicine are recommended for prevention of constrictive pericarditis; however, there is no evidence about the effect of colchicine on constrictive pericarditis. Thus, the aim of this study is to evaluate the preventive effect of colchicine on the incidence of echocardiographic constrictive physiology after open-heart surgery.

METHODS

This was a parallel randomized, double-blind trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 mg colchicine once-daily from 48 hours before and 0.5 mg twice daily for 5 days after surgery. Primary outcome was the incidence of the constrictive physiology after primary endpoint (1 week after the surgery). The secondary outcome was the primary outcome after secondary endpoint (4 weeks after surgery) plus the new cases of constrictive physiology between the primary and secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Out of 160 participating patients, the primary outcome occurred in 19 patients (23%) in placebo and 11 (13%) in intervention groups. There was no significant difference between two groups (P = .106). After 4 weeks of follow-up, 19 patients (23%) in placebo and 9 (11%) in intervention groups had constrictive physiology whereas 2 out of 11 patients (18.2%) were recovered. The difference was significant (P = .038). No new case of constrictive physiology occurred between primary and secondary endpoints.

CONCLUSION

Short-term use of colchicine has a preventive effect on reducing constrictive physiology after 1 month of open-heart surgery but not a week after that.