Pericardiocentesis: differential aspects of a common procedure

Intensive Care Med. 2000 May;26(5):572-6. doi: 10.1007/s001340051206.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the risk and effectiveness of pericardiocentesis in primary and repeat cardiac tamponade.

Design: Retrospective analysis.

Setting: Intensive care unit in a medical university hospital.

Patients: Sixty-three consecutively admitted patients with cardiac tamponade.

Interventions: In all patients pericardiocentesis was performed via the subxiphoid pathway after echocardiographic detection of the pericardial effusion.

Measurements and results: There was no adverse event in patients undergoing primary pericardiocentesis, which was sufficient to resolve pericardial effusion in 51 of 63 patients (81%). However, repeat pericardiocentesis necessitated by the recurrence of symptomatic pericardial effusion yielded suboptimal results in 10 of 12 patients (83%).

Conclusion: Pericardiocentesis is the treatment of choice for primary symptomatic pericardial effusion. In recurrent pericardial effusion surgical approaches appear to be preferable.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Cardiac Tamponade / therapy*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Intensive Care Units
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Neoplasms / complications
  • Pericardial Effusion / diagnostic imaging
  • Pericardial Effusion / etiology
  • Pericardial Effusion / surgery
  • Pericardial Effusion / therapy*
  • Pericardiocentesis*
  • Recurrence
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Risk Factors
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Ultrasonography