These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Pericardial effusion: subxiphoid pericardiostomy versus percutaneous catheter drainage.
    Author: Allen KB, Faber LP, Warren WH, Shaar CJ.
    Journal: Ann Thorac Surg; 1999 Feb; 67(2):437-40. PubMed ID: 10197666.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Optimal management of cardiac tamponade resulting from pericardial effusion remains controversial. METHODS: Cardiac tamponade in 117 patients was treated with either subxiphoid pericardiostomy (n = 94) or percutaneous catheter drainage (n = 23). Percutaneous catheter drainage was used for patients with hemodynamic instability that precluded subxiphoid pericardiostomy. Effusions were malignant in 75 (64%) of 117 patients and benign in 42 (36%) of 117. RESULTS: Subxiphoid pericardiostomy had no operative deaths and a complication rate of 1.1% (1 of 94). In contrast, percutaneous drainage had significantly (p < 0.05) higher mortality and complication rates of 4% (1 of 23) and 17% (4 of 23), respectively. Patients with an underlying malignancy had a median survival of 2.2 months, with a 1-year actuarial survival rate of 13.8%. In comparison, patients with benign disease had a median survival of 42.8 months and a 1-, 2-, and 4-year actuarial survival rate of 79%, 73%, and 49%, respectively (p < 0.05). Effusions recurred in 1 (1.1%) of 94 patients after subxiphoid pericardiostomy compared with 7 (30.4%) of 23 patients with percutaneous drainage (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Benign and malignant pericardial tamponade can be safely and effectively managed with subxiphoid pericardiostomy. Percutaneous catheter drainage should be reserved for patients with hemodynamic instability.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]