Comparison of open subxiphoid pericardial drainage with percutaneous catheter drainage for symptomatic pericardial effusion

BACKGROUND: The optimal therapy for symptomatic pericardial effusions remains controversial. This paper compares outcomes after the two most commonly used techniques, percutaneous catheter drainage and operative subxiphoid pericardial drainage. METHODS: We performed a 5-year retrospective, single-institution study to analyze outcomes after either percutaneous catheter drainage or subxiphoid open pericardial drainage for symptomatic pericardial effusions. RESULTS: Symptomatic pericardial effusions in 246 patients were treated by open pericardiotomy and tube drainage (n = 150) or percutaneous catheter drainage (n = 96). Drainage duration, total drainage volume, and duration of follow-up (2.6 years) were similar in both groups. Effusions were classified malignant in 79 (32%) patients and benign in 167 (68%) patients. No direct procedural mortality occurred, but the hospital mortality was 16 patients (10.7%) in the open group and 22 (22.9%) in the percutaneous group (p = 0.01) The 5-year survival rate was 51% in the open group versus 45% in the percutaneous group, despite a greater percentage of the open group having a preoperative malignant diagnosis (35% versus 28%). Symptomatic effusions recurred in 16.5% of the percutaneous group compared with 4.6% in the open group (p = 0.002), and sclerosis did not appear to reduce recurrence rates (10.7% with sclerosis versus 15.6% without; p > 0.05). The diagnosis of malignancy was confirmed in 16 of 27 (59%) percutaneous procedures performed on patients with known malignancy. In the open group, cytologic and pathologic evaluation of the pericardial specimen revealed malignancy in 32 of 52 (62%) patients with known malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Subxiphoid and percutaneous pericardial drainage of symptomatic pericardial effusions can be performed safely; however, death occurs from underlying disease. Open subxiphoid pericardial drainage with pericardial biopsy appears to decrease recurrence but does not improve diagnostic accuracy of malignancy over cytology alone.     

Eleven years' experience with pericardial-peritoneal window in the management of malignant and benign pericardial effusions

Background: Before 1983 we routinely used subxiphoid drainage for the management of pericardial effusions. Pericardial-pleural window through a left anterior thoracotomy was used in selected patients. Due to frustration over the rate of recurrent pericardial effusions with subxiphoid drainage alone and concern over the higher morbidity with thoracotomy, the creation of a 3-cm pericardial-peritoneal window in the fused portion of the pericardium and diaphragm overlying the left lobe of the liver was added to subxiphoid drainage in 1983. Methods: This study is a retrospective chart review of the 33 patients undergoing pericardial-peritoneal window from 1983 through 1993. Eighteen patients had malignancies, mainly lung and breast, and 15 had benign pericardial effusions. Results: The procedure was well tolerated, with a 30-day mortality of 9%; however, no deaths were directly related to the pericardial effusion or the procedure. No patient developed peritoneal carcinomatosis or diaphragmatic hernia. One patient developed recurrent pericardial effusion during follow-up, and two required pericardiectomy for constrictive disease. Among those with malignancies, patients with breast cancer had the longest survival after pericardial-peritoneal window. Conclusions: Pericardial-peritoneal window is a simple, safe, and effective procedure and applicable to most patients with malignant and noninfectious benign pericardial effusion, including those with tamponade. Presented at the 47th Annual Cancer Symposium of The Society of Surgical Oncology, Houston, Texas, March 17–20, 1994.     

Surgical management of effusive pericardial disease. Influence of extent of pericardial resection on clinical course

Surgical drainage for effusive pericardial disease is usually accompanied by pericardial resection to obtain tissue for analysis and to lessen the chance of recurrent effusion or late constriction. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between the extent of resection and the development of late complications. From 1960 through 1983, 145 patients with pure pericardial effusive disease underwent operative drainage. The effusions were malignant in 72 patients (49.7%) and benign in 73 (50.3%). The patients were divided into three groups according to the extent of resection: complete in 72 patients (49.7%), partial in 36 (24.8%), and window in 37 (25.5%). The 30 day mortality was 19.4% for patients with malignant effusions and 5.5% for those with benign effusions (p less than 0.05). All survivors had immediate improvement in symptoms. The actuarial 1 year survival rate was 23.4% (mean 4.2 months) for patients with malignant disease and 85.6% for patients with idiopathic effusions (p less than 0.001). Survival was not influenced by the extent of resection. Fifteen patients (10.3%) had late constriction or recurrent effusion. Six of these required reoperation, all after having had a window procedure. Actuarial probability of reoperation or late complication was greater with window procedures than other resections, both for all patients (p = 0.0001) and for those with benign disease (p = 0.0001). Transthoracic complete pericardiectomy is the procedure of choice for effusive pericardial disease. Subxiphoid drainage has immediate advantages for selected patients but has a statistically greater chance of late complications.     

A prospective trial of subxiphoid pericardiotomy in the diagnosis and treatment of large pericardial effusion. A follow-up report.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to determine the cause of large pericardial effusions and evaluate the efficacy of subxiphoid pericardiotomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Despite great advances in the techniques used to diagnose pericardial effusions, much controversy remains concerning their cause and the optimal treatment of these effusions. METHODS: In a prospective consecutive case series, 57 patients underwent a thorough preoperative evaluation followed by a subxiphoid pericardiotomy. All tissue and fluid was exhaustively evaluated. Postoperatively, all patients were followed for a least 1 year. RESULTS: Surgery was performed under local anesthesia in 77% of patients, and the complications of surgery were minimal. Pericardial tissue and fluid established or aided in establishing a diagnosis in 81% of patients. Infection and malignancy were the leading causes; the condition in only 4 patients remained undiagnosed. Follow-up revealed recurrent effusion in nine (16%) patients, but only five (9%) required further surgery. The mortality rate at 30 days was 12%, and at 1 year, it was 37%. Fourteen of the 21 deaths occurred in patients with malignancies. CONCLUSIONS: These data show that the cause of most large pericardial effusions can be determined by a thorough evaluation accompanied by subxiphoid pericardiotomy. In addition, subxiphoid pericardial biopsy and window creation is safe and effective in the treatment of these effusions.     

Pericardial catheter sclerosis versus surgical procedures for pericardial effusions in cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Approximately 21% of patients with advanced malignancies have cardiac or pericardial involvement with tumor. Controversy exists regarding the optimal approach to the pericardial space when hemodynamic compromise due to effusions occurs. METHODS: A six-year retrospective review of 59 cancer patients with pericardial effusions. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients had subxiphoid pericardial window (SXPW) alone (Group A), 5 had pericardial catheter drainage (PCD) followed by a SXPW (Group B), 10 had PCD with sclerosis (Group C), 5 had PCD alone (Group D), 2 had PCD with pericardial-pleural window (Group E), and one had pericardial-peritoneal window (Group F). The method of procedure, complications, number of hospital and ICU days, cytological or pathologic evidence of malignancy, solid versus hematological tumors, and survival were analyzed. The median survival for those patients in group C was one month compared to 4 months for Group A and 6 months for Group B. Essentially, results were similar regardless of method performed with the exception that professional and hospital charges averaged $4830 for SXPW compared to $1625 for PCD. CONCLUSIONS: Pericardial catheter drainage and sclerosis provides a viable option for the treatment of pericardial effusions in selected cancer patients at markedly reduced cost and patient discomfort.     

Clinical experience with subxiphoid drainage of pericardial effusions

To assess the effectiveness of subxiphoid pericardial tube drainage for treatment of pericardial effusion, we reviewed 41 consecutive patients who underwent this procedure during a 14-year period. The patients ranged in age from 7 months to 75 years. All were symptomatic preoperatively. The diagnosis of pericardial effusion was confirmed by echocardiogram in all but 2 patients. Eight patients had acute pericardial tamponade. Subxiphoid pericardial drainage was performed under general (n = 35) or local anesthesia (n = 6). A portion of the anterior pericardium was excised in each patient. There were no perioperative deaths. Thirty-day mortality was 19.5%; there were five late deaths. All deaths were unrelated to pericardial effusion or to the operation. One patient had recurrent effusion requiring pericardiocentesis on the 21st postoperative day. He died five days later of extensive lymphoma. Twenty-eight patients were followed from 1 month to 10 years; mean follow-up was 31.5 months. None developed recurrent effusion or pericardial constriction. We conclude that subxiphoid pericardial drainage is effective for treatment of pericardial effusion.     

Pericardial window: mechanisms of efficacy

Although the term implies a persistent communication through which fluid might drain, how a pericardial window works is not clear. We believe that the mechanism of success is not window but rather fusion of the epicardium to the pericardium with obliteration of the potential space. To evaluate this, we studied 28 patients, all of whom underwent a subxiphoid pericardial window procedure with tube drainage maintained until output was minimal. There were no operative deaths, and 26 patients (92.9%) obtained permanent relief. Postoperative echocardiograms demonstrated thickening of the pericardium/epicardium and obliteration of the pericardial space. Autopsy performed on 4 patients who died of their underlying malignancy confirmed this fusion, which begins as an inflammatory process. A subxiphoid pericardial window relieves effusions with a low operative mortality and good long-term success (92.9%, 26 of 28). This success is dependent on the inflammatory fusion of the epicardium to pericardium and not maintenance of a window. Tube decompression should be maintained until fluid output is minimal to allow apposition and fusion of the two surfaces.     

Pericardial effusion: subxiphoid pericardiostomy versus percutaneous catheter drainage

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.     

Subxiphoid pericardial window and penetrating cardiac trauma

Between 1982 and 1986, 108 patients with penetrating wounds in proximity to the heart and no obvious signs of cardiac injury underwent a diagnostic subxiphoid pericardial window procedure. Eighty-four patients had stab wounds, 22 had gunshot wounds, and two had shotgun wounds. The subxiphoid pericardial window procedure produced positive results in 30 patients (28%) and negative results in 78 patients (72%). There were two false-positive subxiphoid pericardial window procedures. Eleven patients (39%) with cardiac injuries were not hypotensive and did not have signs or symptoms of cardiac injuries prior to the subxiphoid pericardial window procedure. When they were obtained (n = 80), electrocardiograms were abnormal in 57% and 21% of patients with and without cardiac injuries, respectively. At thoracotomy, 28 patients had injuries (ventricle, 20; atrium, three; and pericardium, five) and 21 required suture repair. Thirty-nine patients underwent a concomitant laparotomy. Forty-six abdominal visceral injuries were identified in 28 patients, including 21 hollow viscus injuries. There was no significant short-term or long-term morbidity (eg, pericarditis, tamponade, or post-pericardiotomy syndrome) attributable to the subxiphoid pericardial window procedure. There were no known missed cardiac injuries, and there were no deaths in the series. Some patients with penetrating wounds to the heart have no overt signs or symptoms of cardiac injury. A subxiphoid pericardial window procedure quickly identifies or excludes cardiac injuries and can be performed with minimal morbidity, even when there is contamination from the gastrointestinal tract.     

Which treatment in pericardial effusion?

BACKGROUND: Pericardiocentesis, pleuro-pericardial window, subxiphoid pericardial drainage and pericardioscopy: which methodology to treat pericardial effusion? Each of these surgical treatments can be effective, depending on clinical factors and history of the patients. We considered pericardial effusions during 5 years. METHODS: We reviewed 64 cases: 14 acute pericardial effusions (5 patients with cardiac tamponade), 39 subacute, 11 chronic. Epidemiology and aetiology: 8 cases were between 20 and 25 years old (all affected by lymphoma), 56 were distributed in every age, especially over 60, and of these 45 were neoplastic and 11 non- neoplastic. Non-neoplastic cases were connectivitis (3 patients), uncertain origin effusion (7 patients), tubercular (1 patient). In neoplastic effusions we found lymphoma (at older age) in 7, small cell lung cancer in 6, NSCLC in 12, mesothelioma in 2, breast cancer in 7. RESULTS: Acute pericardial effusions with cardiac tamponade underwent echo-guided pericardiocentesis. In 43 we had a subxiphoid pericardial drainage, among these cases we performed 4 pericardioscopies. We created a pleuro-pericardial window on VATS in 13, on thoracotomy in 4 for technical reasons. CONCLUSIONS: Pericardiocentesis is to be preferred in acute pericardial effusion with cardiac tamponade to avoid general anaesthesia. Pleuro-pericardial window on VATS is better in chronic pericardial effusion (for infective or systemic disease) and in recurrence, after performing subxiphoid drainage. Subxiphoid drainage is suitable for all neoplastic patients, and in case of unknown aetiology in order to perform a pericardioscopy.     

The Subxiphoid Approach to Pericardial Disease

During the 36-month period from July, 1978, through July, 1981, 25 patients underwent a subxiphoid pericardial window procedure for diagnosis and therapy. Twelve patients were operated on for uremic pericarditis, 6 for malignancy, and 7 for etiological diagnosis of the pericarditis. All 12 patients with renal failure had enlarging effusions, despite aggressive dialysis. Eleven of the 12 are alive, free from recurrence, 3 to 36 months postoperatively. Six patients were operated on for suspected pericardial malignancy with hemodynamic compromise. Histological diagnosis was made from the pericardial tissue in all patients; only 1 patient lived more than 43 days following the procedure.In the group of 7 patients operated on for diagnosis, 4 were thought preoperatively to have tuberculous pericarditis. All 4 were treated with antituberculosis chemotherapy and are asymptomatic, without evidence of calcification, 12 to 31 months postoperatively.This diverse group of patients demonstrates that the subxiphoid pericardial window is an effective approach for relief of uremic effusions and may adequately treat effusive tuberculous pericarditis when combined with multidrug chemotherapy. Patients with suspected malignant pericardial disease and hemodynamic compromise need to be carefully studied before an operative procedure is considered as a means of diagnosis and therapy.     

Pericardoscopy for primary management of pericardial effusion in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the usefulness of pericardoscopy via the subxyphoid route for the diagnosis and treatment of pericardial effusion in patients with a history of cancer. METHODS: All patients with a recent or remote history of cancer and a pericardial effusion of unknown origin requiring drainage for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes were included in the study. They underwent complete exploration and cleansing of the pericardial cavity. Abnormal structures or deposits were biopsied under direct visual control, with a 24 cm long rigid pericardoscope. RESULTS: Between 1985 and 1998, pericardoscopy was completed in 112 of the 114 patients included (feasibility 98%), resulting in the immediate relief of symptoms in all the cases. Peri-operative mortality was 3.5%, and post-operative morbidity, 6.1%. After pericardioscopy pericardial effusions were considered malignant in 43 cases. One more case (2.3%) due to a false negative result of pericardioscopy was diagnosed during follow-up. Overall, 44 of the 114 patients (38.6%) had a malignant effusion, and 70 (61.4%), a non-malignant effusion according the follow up. In 10 of the 44 patients with a malignant pericardial effusion (22.7%), pericardoscopy corrected the results of cytological pericardial fluid studies and pericardial window biopsy, both false negatives. The sensitivities of cytological studies of the pericardial fluid, pathological examinations of pericardial window biopsy and pericardioscopy were 75, 65 and 97%, respectively. One patient with a malignant effusion had a non-symptomatic recurrence 1 month after pericardioscopy (2.3%). CONCLUSION: We recommend pericardioscopy to ascertain the malignant nature of the effusion and to diminish the recurrence rate, this avoiding repeat procedures in patients with a short life expectancy.     

Surgical treatment of large pericardial effusions. Etiology and long-term survival

From 1977 to 1988 60 patients were treated for large pericardial effusion. The operation consisted of a small left anterior thoracotomy with formation of a pericardial window. In 28 patients (47%) the etiology was a malignant disease. Eight patients (29%) had malignant cells in the pericardial fluid and 23 patients (82%) had metastases to the pericardium. Seven patients (12%) had purulent pericarditis; in 4 cases Staphylococcus was found. Of the remaining 25 patients, the etiology remained unknown in 13. The 5-year survival rate was 60% among patients with nonmalignant effusions. In patients with malignant effusions only 20% were alive after 2 years. There were no deaths related to the operation. We conclude that large pericardial effusions of unknown etiology can be safely treated with a small left anterior thoracotomy. This access gives optimal possibilities for rapid diagnosis and treatment.     

Clinical experience with subxyphoid pericardial decompression

Between 1971 and 1981, 108 patients with pericardial effusion were treated by subxyphoid pericardial decompression. 68 patients (63%) had local anesthesia, while general anesthesia was used in 40 (37%). The total group included nonspecific (viral) pericarditis in 35 patients (32.4%), uremic pericarditis in 30 (27.8%); and 20 patients (18.5%) with a malignant etiology, traumatic in ten patients (9.3%), six patients (5.6%) following radiation for malignant disease, and seven patients (6.5%) due to other causes. Echocardiography was diagnostic in all cases. Acute cardiac tamponade necessitated pericardiocentesis as an initial procedure in seven patients (6.5%). Subxyphoid pericardial decompression included drainage of the pericardial fluid and performance of a 5 X 5 cm pericardial window and biopsy of all patients. There were two (1.8%) operative deaths in the general anesthesia group but none in the local anesthesia group. There were no major complication in the local anesthesia group, but one patient in the general anesthesia group, who was severely hypertensive preoperatively, developed hemiplegia on the left side. There were five recurrences (4.6%) requiring total pericardiectomy at a later date. Subxyphoid pericardial decompression under local anesthesia was seen to be a safe and effective procedure for primary decompression and diagnosis of acute or chronic pericardial effusion.     

Subxiphoid approach to the pericardium

Pericardiotomy was performed via the subxiphoid route in 19 patients, 7 with benign and 12 with malignant disorders. Partial pericardial resection ('fenestration') was undertaken in nine of the patients with malignant disease, and pericardial tube drainage or insertion of pacemaker electrode in the other ten patients. There were no intraoperative deaths. The 16% hospital mortality was attributable to the underlying disease. Subxiphoid pericardial decompression is a simple, safe and effective procedure in the management of pericardial effusion. Particularly in malignant conditions it can give excellent palliation.     

Pericardiocentesis with extended catheter drainage: an effective therapy

BACKGROUND: The most effective method for managing pericardial effusions has yet to be identified. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of echocardiographic-guided placement of indwelling catheters into the pericardial space. METHODS: This study consists of a 5-year retrospective chart review of consecutive patients coded with benign or malignant pericardial effusions who presented for drainage procedures to a single surgeon at a 260-bed hospital. Complication, recurrence, and survival rates were studied. RESULTS: Between January 1996 and August 2001, a total of 29 pericardial drainage procedures were performed; eight of those also underwent talc sclerosis. Mean follow-up was 16 months. Three patients (10%) required conversion to thoracotomy; of those remaining, 25 of the 26 procedures were performed under local anesthesia with intravenous sedation. The identified etiologies for pericardial effusions were malignancy (76%), idiopathic (14%), postcoronary artery bypass grafting procedure (3%), viral pericarditis (3%), and uremia (3%). Echocardiographic features of tamponade were documented in 72%. Mean +/- SEM length of postprocedure in-hospital stay was 6.7 +/- 0.82 days. The overall complication rate was 10% (pneumothorax and cardiac injury). Recurrence rate within 30 days was 7%. Thirty-day mortality was 21%, and more than 90-day survival was 72%. CONCLUSIONS: Pericardiocentesis with extended catheter drainage is a safe treatment for management of clinically significant, malignant and benign, pericardial effusions and can be performed effectively under local anesthesia with intravenous sedation.     

Delayed pericardial effusion following stab wounds to the chest.

INTRODUCTION: Delayed pericardial effusion following penetrating cardiac trauma has not been commonly reported, and the exact incidence remains unknown. It was more common before 1960, when pericardiocentesis was still a popular treatment for stable patients presenting with a stab wound to the heart. MATERIAL AND METHODS: During an 8-year period, 24 patients were diagnosed with delayed pericardial effusions following a recent stab wound over the chest. Nine patients had been initially treated at our trauma unit, and the remaining 15 patients were referred by a peripheral clinic. RESULTS: Diagnosis was confirmed by cardiac ultrasound or echocardiogram. Sixteen patients were adequately treated by subxiphoid drainage. Sternotomy was performed in five patients, left thoracotomy in two and right thoracotomy in one patient. No actively bleeding injuries were found. Three patients had active infection in the pericardial space. Fever, pleural effusions and ascites were common associated findings. Additional procedures performed included laparotomy for acute abdominal pain in two patients (both negative), and simultaneous drainage of a pleural empyema. Two patients with staphylococcal pericardial infections required subsequent pericardiectomy. SUMMARY: The diagnosis of a penetrating cardiac patient may be missed in a stable patient, and patients may present with delayed pericardial effusions and tamponade. Post pericardiotomy syndrome may be the most common cause of delayed pericardial effusion, followed by sepsis. Subxiphoid pericardial window is an adequate form of treatment. Recent literature reveals that occult cardiac injury is not uncommon, thus a case should be made to actively investigate all patients with precordial stab wounds with cardiac ultrasound or echocardiogram.     

Subxiphoid Pericardial Window in Patients with Suspected Traumatic Pericardial Tamponade

The technique, indications, and results of subxiphoid pericardial window in penetrating chest wounds with suspected traumatic pericardial tamponade are reported.The classic signs of pericardial tamponade (elevated central venous pressure, muffled heart sounds, and paradoxical pulse) are unreliable in an emergency situation. Chest roentgenograms and electrocardiograms are of little diagnostic value. Pericar-dicentesis was either falsely positive or negative in 50% of our patients. Therefore, unexplainedhigh central venous pressure and hypotension were considered to be pericardial tamponade until disproved by the results of a subxiphoid pericardial window.There were 4 negative and 46 positive findings of tamponade in 50 consecutive patients with suspected traumatic pericardial tamponade who underwent creation of a subxiphoid pericardial window. There were no deaths or complications from the procedure. The early use of subxiphoid pericardial window has been a major factor in reducing our mortality rate from penetrating heart wounds to 12% overall, and 8% in the past three years.     

Evaluation of occult cardiac injuries using subxiphoid pericardial window

During 1987, we performed diagnostic subxiphoid pericardial windows on all stable patients with juxta-cardiac penetrating injuries. This excluded any patient with clinically diagnosed tamponade or shock. Fifty-one patients underwent subxiphoid diagnostic pericardiotomy for suspected cardiac injuries. Forty patients were normotensive on presentation and 11 experienced transient hypotension. All patients were easily resuscitated in the Emergency Department. The time from admission to operation ranged from 20 minutes to 6 hours (average, 2.5 hours). Twelve patients (23.5%) had hemopericardium at the time of subxiphoid diagnostic pericardiotomy (SDP), and cardiac injury was confirmed at sternotomy in all. Two patients (16%) in the positive group were admitted with systolic blood pressures less than 100 mm Hg compared to nine (23%) in the negative group. One patient had a systolic to diastolic pressure gradient less than 30. Central venous pressures in this group of patients ranged from 8 to 23 cm H2O. Nine patients who had pericardial window solely on the basis of location of the injury had positive findings. All nine patients were normotensive on admission, had CVP's less than 12, and had no other overt clinical signs of injury. This represents an overall occult injury rate of 17.6%. At sternotomy, there were eight ventricular, two pulmonary artery, one aortic root, and one atrial injury, all repaired. Two patients in this group had associated abdominal injuries as did 11 in the negative group, all of whom required operation, and may have explained the hypotension in negative patients. There were no complications of SDP and all negative patients were discharged on the second hospital day.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Pericardial Window for Malignant Pericardial Effusion

Seventeen patients with malignant pericardial effusion were treated by the creation of a pericardial window. This was done through a subxiphoid approach in 13 patients and through limited anterior thoracotomy or sternotomy incisions in 4.There were no deaths and no major complications attributable to the operation. In all patients, relief of the cardiac compression caused by the effusion was immediate and complete. No patient showed a clinically significant recurrence of the effusion, although 1 patient who had received irradiation required pericardiectomy for constriction 5 months later.Survival was determined principally by the extent of the primary malignancy. Six patients died of the primary tumors within 30 days, but 6 survived 3 to 12 months and 2 are alive at 8 and 21 months.It is concluded that creation of a pericardial window, preferably by the subxiphoid approach, is the treatment of choice for malignant pericardial effusion. The procedure provides an accurate diagnosis, carries virtually no mortality or morbidity, and affords immediate and long-lasting relief of cardiac compression.