Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 29 December 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a2678
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a2678
R Som, foundation year 2 doctor1, A Li, specialist trainee in cardiology1, R McIntosh, research registrar1, G W Lloyd, consultant cardiologist1
1 Department of Cardiology, Eastbourne District General Hospital, Eastbourne BN21 2UD
Correspondence to: R Som rsom{at}doctors.org.uk
A 59 year old man with a history of heavy smoking presented to casualty with two days of acutely worsening shortness of breath on a background of progressive breathlessness over three months. He had noticed his voice becoming hoarse and a lump appearing above his left clavicle, with worsening dysphagia and non-specific chest pain. On examination he had no fever, blood pressure 97/64 mm Hg, and regular heart rate of 105 bpm, with oxygen saturation of 92% on air. He had clubbing with generalised facial and neck swelling, with suffused conjunctivae and a jugular venous pressure to the jaw raised to 15 cm. Bilateral supraclavicular lymphadenopathy was noted. His heart sounds were muffled and, apart from a hyperexpanded chest, his lungs were clear to auscultation. Abdominal examination showed no organomegaly. A 12 lead electrocardiogram showed sinus tachycardia with low voltage complexes, and a chest radiograph showed a widened mediastinum with an enlarged globular cardiac silhouette.
Short answers
Long answer
Outcome
Urgent echocardiography showed a large pericardial effusion causing haemodynamic compromise, shown by diastolic collapse of the right ventricle in diastole and greater variation in speed of blood flow across the mitral valve with respiration. On pericardiocentesis, 1 litre of blood stained fluid was aspirated and a percutaneous catheter drain inserted; symptoms improved somewhat but the jugular venous pressure remained high.
Analysis of the pericardial fluid showed an exudative effusion. No malignant cells were seen.
Computed tomography showed extensive bilateral lymphadenopathy extending retrosternally into the superior mediastinum, causing superior vena cava obstruction, with right basal lung field opacity consistent with primary lung carcinoma. The patient was unsuitable for stenting and radiotherapy because his clinical state was deteriorating rapidly. He died 12 hours after admission.
Clinical review
The presentation and management of pericardial effusion depends on the cause, clinical findings, and time course of presentation. Many patients with chronic idiopathic effusions may not have symptoms, as the pericardium has had time to expand; however, the complications of an acute effusion can be fatal, as cardiac output is rapidly compromised. This review discusses the recognition, investigation, and treatment of pericardial effusions.
Aetiology and epidemiology
Comprehensive epidemiological studies of pericardial effusion are few and far between, but in general autopsy studies, 3.4% of subjects have a pericardial effusion.1
The aetiology varies geographically. The common causes of pericardial perfusion are infection (16-27%), malignancy (13-23%), and iatrogenic (13-18%) (commonly cardiac surgery or interventions, but also drug induced pericarditis, such as by clozapine2).3 4 5 The malignancies most often implicated are lung, lymphoma, and breast.6 In the United Kingdom, infective effusions are usually viral; bacterial infections (staphylococcal, tuberculous, etc) may also be responsible for pericardial effusion. Uraemia and autoimmune diseases are less common but important causes.3
Clinical evaluation
Establishing the patients medical background is essential, as any underlying, relevant disease is likely to be the cause of an effusion.7
Patients may have chest pain that is relieved by sitting up and exacerbated by lying flat. Dyspnoea and dysphagia are important symptoms caused by local compression. Phrenic nerve compression may cause hiccups, and recurrent laryngeal nerve compression may cause hoarseness.
Pericardial effusion without tamponade has few signs on examination—the jugular venous pressure can be raised, with a deep x descent (caused by rapid diastolic early filling), and Kussmauls sign (paradoxical rise of pressure on inspiration) may also be evident. Ewarts sign has been described as dull percussion, increased vocal resonance, or bronchial breathing at the base of the left scapula. This is secondary to atelactasis caused by the enlarged pericardial sac.1
Cardiac tamponade is a medical emergency and the patient may subsequently have cardiogenic shock. It is critical to examine for stigmata of haemodynamic compromise, and tamponade presents classically with Becks triad (quiet heart sounds on auscultation accompanied by hypotension and increased central venous pressure7). Measuring the patients blood pressure may show pulsus paradoxus (systolic blood pressure falling by more than 10 mm Hg on inspiration); this accurately estimates the degree of compromise in patients with tamponade.8
Differential diagnoses for patients with raised jugular venous pressure, hypotension, and dyspnoea should include pulmonary embolus and, rarely, myocardial wall rupture following infarction.
Clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for pericardial effusion when any of the above symptoms and signs are present on a background of pericarditis, myocardial infarction, malignancy, infection, recent thoracic procedures (particularly valve replacement), and autoimmune disease. A thorough drug history is also essential.
Investigations
Echocardiography establishes the diagnosis, provides clues about cause and prognosis, and guides percutaneous pericardial drainage.7 9 10 11 Pericardial effusions appear in the pericardial space as "echo-free" areas (see fig 1)
. The size of this area in diastole can be used to grade effusions.9
|
|
|
Effusions secondary to viral causes do not normally require specific pharmacological treatment.11 Bacterial effusions, on the other hand, require empirical intravenous antibiotic therapy with an anti-staphylococcus antibiotic such as vancomycin, and an aminoglycoside.11 This should be changed as necessary according to results of cultures.
A reducing course of prednisolone over two months in conjunction with antituberculous agents has been shown to reduce mortality in patients with tuberculous effusions.20
Uraemic pericarditis requires renal replacement therapy, usually with haemodialysis.
The European Society of Cardiology states that cardiac tamponade is an absolute indication for therapeutic pericardiocentesis, a principle largely agreed worldwide.21 22 The life saving principles of the management of tamponade are immediate drainage and fluid resuscitation. The aim of the latter is to increase right sided filling pressures by giving intravenous fluids, but this should not delay pericardiocentesis. The patient should be monitored on a coronary care unit.
In pericardiocentesis, guidance with echocardiogram23 24 or fluoroscopy is preferable to blind performance. Fluoroscopy allows for haemodynamic monitoring via right heart catheterisation11 and is particularly effective for very small effusions (<200 ml).21 Relative contraindications are bleeding diatheses and use of anticoagulants. Major complications secondary to pericardiocentesis include myocardial tissue and coronary vessel laceration, pneumothorax, and perforation of abdominal viscus.21
The rate of recurrence of malignant effusion is as high as 60%,25 26 so long term follow-up is necessary. This includes appropriate medical or surgical management of the underlying neoplasm.
Success rates for intrapericardial sclerosing agents, especially tetracycline, are high,7 but the adverse effects (fever, chest pain, and atrial arrhythmias) are common.9 Although the intrapericardial use of the chemotherapy agent cisplatin is useful in effusions secondary to lung cancer,27 there is little evidence to support the use of other agents in reducing the recurrence rate of effusions in other malignancies. Intrapericardial radionuclides have yielded positive results, but the logistics of handling radioactive material have prevented widespread adoption of this technique.11
When medical treatment and repeat pericardiocentesis have failed, the pericardium will require decompression. One such technique is percutaneous pericardiotomy—balloon inflation of the pericardium allows passage of fluid into the pleural space, where it is reabsorbed (but there is a risk of disseminating neoplastic cells).7 Surgical drainage of effusions is as effective as balloon pericardiotomy28 and is recommended by the European Society of Cardiology in purulent effusions.9 Pericardioectomy, with its high mortality (4.2-5.6%29 30), should be considered as a last resort, mainly as treatment for constrictive pericarditis.9
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a2678
Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Patient consent not required (patient anonymised, dead, or hypothetical).
. Practical aspects of the management of pericardial disease. Heart 2003;89:1096-103.
PM, Risti
AD, Maksimovi
R, et al. Therapeutic pericardiocentesis: up-to-date review of indications, efficacy, and risks. In: Seferovi
PM, Spodick DH, Maisch B, eds, Maksimovi
R, Risti
AD, eds. Pericardiology: contemporary answers to continuing challenges. Belgrade: Science, 2000:417-26.
AD, Pankuweit S, Neubauer A, Moll R. Neoplastic pericardial effusion: efficacy and safety of intrapericardial treatment with cisplatin. Eur Heart J 2002;23:1625-31.