Pericardiocentesis Guided by Two-Dimensional Echocardiography

Echodirected pericardiocentesis has become the method of choice for the initial treatment of clinically significant pericardial effusions since it was introduced into the regular practice at the Mayo Medical Center in April 1980. Between April 1980 and January 1, 1994, 610 consecutive two-dimensional (2-D) echodirected pericardiocenteses were performed at the Mayo Clinic. There have been no deaths in the series of consecutive cases. In the first 500 consecutive cases examined in detail, there were five serious complications and 18 nonthreatening complications. Echodirected pericardiocentesis is a safe, humane, and cost-effective means of performing a pericardial tap. Excellent results have been obtained even with a large number of physician operators. This technique is well suited to the primary care setting. Physicians performing this procedure should be familiar with reading and performing 2-D echocardiography. Qualified physicians can be trained, fairly easily, to perform echodirected pericardiocentesis.     

Pericardiocentesis guided by two-dimensional contrast echocardiography

The clinical application of two-dimensional contrast echocardiography to pericardiocentesis was investigated in 20 patients with pericardial effusion. Multiple views were obtained to determine the ideal needle entry route. During pericardiocentesis, after 5 to 10 mL of pericardial fluid was withdrawn, 3 to 5 mL of agitated saline solution was injected through the exploring needle into the pericardium and a cloud of echoes indicated the needle's position. Contrast echoes were observed in all 20 patients. The procedure was performed smoothly in all patients except two (10%): the exploring needle was inserted into the right atrium in one patient and into the right ventricle in the other patient. The former promptly underwent a surgical drainage procedure, and the latter a second pericardiocentesis successfully guided by contrast echocardiography. The pericardial fluid was simply, safely, and successfully aspirated in the other 18 patients. We conclude that two-dimensional contrast echocardiography is valuable for locating needle position, thus facilitating successful pericardiocentesis in clinical practice.     

Application of 2-dimensional contrast studies during pericardiocentesis

Two-dimensional echocardiographic contrast studies were performed in 16 patients with pericardial effusion. A 4-chamber view was obtained by positioning the transducer at the apex. The exploratory needle was visualized in 9 patients. Five milliliters of saline solution were injected through the exploring needle and a cloud of echoes indicated its position. Microbubbles were seen in all 16 patients. This technique enabled the operator to identify that the needle was inadvertently in the left ventricle in 2 patients and in the right ventricle in 1. Furthermore, in 2 patients, when fluid could not be aspirated, the contrast study confirmed that the needle was in the pericardial sac; in both cases, pericardial fluid could be aspirated with slight manipulation of the needle. In a patient with a stab wound a negative contrast effect indicated the probable site of laceration. Thus, 2-dimensional contrast echocardiography was useful in locating needle position, which facilitated pericardiocentesis.     

Pericardiocentesis afrer heart surgery--our experience

Pericardial effusion after cardiac surgery is common, but only in a small part of patients it has progressive character and cardiac tamponade occurs. Accurate diagnosis and well-timed pericardiocentesis are necessary to effective management of this life threatening complication. The study aimed at presentation of our centre outcomes of echocardiographically-guided pericardiocentesis in patients after cardiac surgery. METHODS: Between December 2005 and November 2007, 2,232 patients underwent open-heart surgery in our centre. At 48 (2.2%) of them pericardiocentesis for clinically significant pericardial effusion was performed. RESULTS: Pericardiocentesis was significantly more frequent after valve surgery (7.1%, p < 0.001), aortic root surgery (8.2%, p < 0.001) and surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation (6.6%, p < 0.001), i.e. in patients who had received postoperative anticoagulation therapy. Echo-guided pericardiocentesis was technically and therapeutically successful in 100% of cases and no complications were registered. The time elapsed between surgery and puncture was in range 6 to 80 days (median, 13 days). The median volume initially aspirated was 450 ml (range, 50 to 1,550 ml). Forty five patients (93.8%) had extended catheter drainage with active suction, the median duration of the drainage was 1 day (range, 1 to 6 days), the mean volume of catheter drainage was 328 ml (median, 145 ml; range, 20 to 2,950 ml). Four patients (8.3%) required repeated pericardiocenteses because of recurrence of significant pericadial effusion. Extended pericardial catheter drainage (after initial evacuation of the effusion) was associated with a significant reduction of recurrence of significant pericadial effusion and with lower probability of repeated pericardiocentesis. We can conclude, echo-guided pericardiocentesis was effective and safe method for primary treatment of postoperative pericardial effusions.     

The risk of pericardiocentesis.

The risk and potential risk factors of pericardiocentesis were assessed by a review of a series of 52 pericardiocenteses comprising all those performed in the cardiac catheterization laboratory of one institution from 1971 to 1978. On the basis of the operative results, the patients were separated into two groups for comparison; Group I comprised all patients with a successful uncomplicated (35) pericardiocentesis and Group II all those with a nonproductive (16), nontherapeutic (1) or complicated (8) pericardiocentesis. Complications consisted of one death, one cardiac arrest, one aspiration of a subdiaphragmatic abscess and five ventricular punctures without adverse sequelae. Among the patients who had a nonproductive pericardiocentesis, the condition of 11 had probably been misdiagnosed but at least 4 had a false negative pericardiocentesis. Comparison of the two groups showed no significant difference in the incidence of cardiac tamponade or in the clinical presentation based on historical, physical, electrocardiographic, roentgenographic or echocardiographic findings of pericardial disease. Pericardiocentesis was usually successful when performed for suspected malignant pericardial effusion but often unsuccessful when performed for suspected hemopericardium. Anatomically, all patients in Group II had either minimal or loculated posterior pericardial effusion. It is concluded that pericardiocentesis can be performed at a low risk that can be further minimized by consideration of the disease process and the anatomic location of the pericardial fluid.     

Cardiac tamponade in medical patients: treatment and prognosis in the echocardiographic era

Experience was reviewed in the management of pericardial tamponade in 36 patients with emphasis on factors governing short and long-term survival. Malignant pericardial effusion was the most common etiology and accounted for pericardial tamponade in 14 of the 36 patients (39%). Of the 36 patients, three received medical therapy alone, 18 were treated by one or more needle pericardiocentesis, pericardial drains were inserted in six patients, and thoracotomy was performed in nine. Needle pericardiocentesis was attempted as the initial therapy in all but two patients and was initially successful in relieving tamponade in 30 patients. Twenty-four patients died during a follow-up of from 1 day to 6 years. Delay in diagnosing tamponade was frequent and accounted for three deaths. Two more patients died from recurrent tamponade following initial relief. Eighteen patients died primarily from complications related to their basic illness, though recurrent pericardial effusion was a contributory factor in five. One patient died following pericardiectomy. The remaining 12 patients are well and free of pericardial disease. Short-term survival in pericardial tamponade is mostly dependent upon early diagnosis and relief of tamponade. Long-term survival depends upon the prognosis of the primary illness, irrespective of the mode of treatment used.     

Primary acute pericardial disease: a prospective series of 231 consecutive patients

A series of 231 patients with "primary" acute pericardial disease (acute pericarditis or tamponade presenting without an apparent cause) were studied according to the following protocol: general clinical and laboratory studies (stage I), pericardiocentesis (stage II), pericardial biopsy (stage III) and blind antituberculous therapy (stage IV). In 32 patients (14%) a specific etiologic diagnosis was obtained (13 with neoplasia, 9 with tuberculosis, 4 with collagen vascular disease, 2 with toxoplasmosis, 2 with purulent pericarditis and 2 with viral pericarditis). "Diagnostic" pericardiocentesis (32 patients) was performed when clinical activity and effusion persisted for longer than 1 week or when purulent pericarditis was suspected, whereas "therapeutic" pericardiocentesis (44 patients) was performed to treat tamponade; their diagnostic yield was 6% and 29%, respectively. "Diagnostic" biopsy (20 patients) was carried out when illness persisted for longer than 3 weeks, whereas "therapeutic" biopsy was performed whenever pericardiocentesis failed to relieve tamponade; their diagnostic yield was 5% and 54%, respectively. The diagnostic yield difference between "diagnostic" and "therapeutic" procedures was significant (p less than 0.001); in contrast, the global diagnostic yield of pericardiocentesis (19%) and biopsy (22%) was similar. At the end of follow-up (1 to 76 months, mean 31 +/- 20), no patient in whom a diagnosis of idiopathic pericarditis had been made showed signs of pericardial disease. It is concluded that a "diagnostic" procedure is not warranted as a routine method, a choice between "therapeutic" pericardiocentesis and biopsy is circumstantial and must be individualized, and only through a systematic approach can a substantial diagnostic yield be reached in primary acute pericardial disease.     

Pericardioscopy and epi- and pericardial biopsy—a new window to the heart improving etiological diagnoses and permitting targeted intrapericardial therapy

The etiology of pericardial effusions remains unresolved in many cases because not the full spectrum of diagnostic methods including cytology, histology, immunohistology and PCR on cardiotropic agents, which are currently available, used in many institutions. After comprehensive clinical workup and use of imaging methods, such as echocardiography and cardiac MRI, pericardiocentesis and epicardial and pericardial biopsy were carried out under pericardioscopical control of the biopsy site. Biopsies and fluid were evaluated by cytological, histological, immunological and molecular (PCR) methods in 259 patients of our tertiary referral center following an identical clinical pathway, diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm in all cases. A standard clinical pathway and the same diagnostic and therapeutic algorithms were used in all cases. When all methods are applied to patients with pericardial effusions, “idiopathic” pericardial effusion is no longer a relevant diagnosis. Autoreactive and lymphocytic pericardial effusions are the leading diagnosis in 35 % of patients in the prospective Marburg registry, followed by malignant effusions in 28 % of cases. Viral genome was assessed in fluid and epi- as well as pericardial biopsies in 12 %, followed by post-traumatic/iatrogenic effusions in 15 % and purulent/bacterial effusions in only 2 %. Pericardioscopy permits the macroscopic inspection of the pulsating heart and its disease-associated macroscopic alterations. It also permits safe and targeted biopsy for further investigations of the tissue. Therapy, tailored to the individual etiology, can be selected such as intrapericardial instillation in autoreactive effusions with triamcinolone and with cisplatin or thiotepa in neoplastic effusions. With this approach the recurrence of pericardial effusion can be avoided effectively. A comprehensive approach to the diagnosis of pericardial effusions in conjunction with pericardioscopy for targeted tissue sampling is the prerequisite for an etiologically based intrapericardial and systemic treatment, which improves outcome and prognosis.     

A Practical Approach to Pericardiocentesis With Periprocedural Use of Ultrasound Training Initiative

Tamponade is a life-threatening condition characterized by fluid accumulation in the pericardium, which compresses the cardiac chambers, impairs diastolic filling, and can lead to clinical shock. The diagnosis is a clinical one that is supported by echocardiographic findings. Pericardiocentesis is the definitive treatment for tamponade; however, it remains a challenge for trainees because of the infrequent exposure compared with other invasive procedures. Moreover, this technique, unlike others, can lead to serious complications including cardiac perforation and arrhythmia. There has been increased attention to periprocedural use of ultrasound in various techniques, particularly pericardiocentesis, given its ability to assess the pericardial effusion as well as the safety and feasibility of the procedure from various trajectories to minimize major and minor complications. As such, periprocedural use of ultrasound for pericardiocentesis has emerged as the preferred initial technique for pericardiocentesis. We outline a simple stepwise approach to prepare and perform pericardiocentesis, facilitated by periprocedural ultrasound, including practical tips from our centre's experiences. These include the proper assessment of the target area defined as the most pericardial fluid with the least interfering structures and troubleshooting the introduction of the needle into the pericardium. Absolute contraindications are few and often require surgery, but knowledge of them is mandatory when assessing patients for pericardiocentesis.     

Quantification of pericardial effusions by echocardiography and computed tomography

Echocardiography is a well-accepted tool for the diagnosis and quantification of pericardial effusion (PEff). Given the increasing use of computed tomographic (CT) scanning, more PEffs are being initially diagnosed by computed tomography. No study has compared quantification of PEff by computed tomography and echocardiography. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of quantification of PEff by 2-dimensional echocardiography and computed tomography compared to the amount of pericardial fluid drained at pericardiocentesis. We retrospectively reviewed an institutional database to identify patients who underwent chest computed tomography and echocardiography before percutaneous pericardiocentesis with documentation of the amount of fluid withdrawn. Digital 2-dimensional echocardiographic and CT images were retrieved and quantification of PEff volume was performed by applying the formula for the volume of a prolate ellipse, π × 4/3 × maximal long-axis dimension/2 × maximal transverse dimension/2 × maximal anteroposterior dimension/2, to the pericardial sac and to the heart. Nineteen patients meeting study qualifications were entered into the study. The amount of PEff drained was 200 to 1,700 ml (mean 674 ± 340). Echocardiographically calculated pericardial effusion volume correlated relatively well with PEff volume (r = 0.73, p <0.001, mean difference -41 ± 225 ml). There was only moderate correlation between CT volume quantification and actual volume drained (r = 0.4, p = 0.004, mean difference 158 ± 379 ml). In conclusion, echocardiography appears a more accurate imaging technique than computed tomography in quantitative assessment of nonloculated PEffs and should continue to be the primary imaging in these patients.     

Pericardiocentesis guided by echocardiography performed in echocardiography laboratory – Safety profile of the single center prospective registry

IntroductionPericardiocentesis is an invasive procedure for treatment of large pericardial effusion or cardiac tamponade and for diagnostics of pericardial effusion of unknown origin. Fluoroscopy navigation has been the preferred method during the past decades. Nevertheless, new imaging methods such as echocardiography emerged as an alternative guiding method for pericardiocentesis. These methods may improve safety of the procedure.MethodsAll consecutive pericardiocenteses performed in noninvasive cardiology department of a tertiary cardiovascular center during the period between 1998 and 2012 were prospectively recorded. We focused on the procedural safety and procedural success rate.ResultsDuring a 15-year period, 253 pericardiocenteses were performed in 185 patients. Most of the procedures (240 cases) were performed under echocardiographic control in our noninvasive cardiology laboratory under strictly sterile conditions and with equipment for cardiopulmonary resuscitation on site. Etiology of effusion was heart transplantation in 38 patients (25%), postoperative in 20 patients (14%), infective pericarditis in 25 patients (16%), malignancy in 18 patients (12%), and invasive procedures in 19 patients (8%). Apical approach was the most frequent in 218 patients (92%), parasternal in 13 patients (5%) and subxiphoideal in 7 patients (3%). The procedural success rate was 97% overall, with a total complication rate of 3% (2 major complications (0.3%); 7 minor complications (2.7%)). Minor complications included 2 cases of small pneumothorax, 2 cases of pericardial fluid drainage into pleural space, 2 cases of transient right chamber entries, and in 1 case the procedure was complicated by hemopericardium without the need for surgical management. Major complications included 2 cases due to ventricular perforation, one with left ventricule wall laceration in a loculated effusion and one complication due to right ventricular laceration, both resulting in hemopericardium and requiring emergency surgical repair.ConclusionEchocardiography-guided pericardiocentesis performed by echocardiologists in noninvasive cardiology department under strictly sterile conditions and with equipment for cardiopulmonary resuscitation is a safe procedure with infrequent complications. Apical entry site is safe and the dominant approach for pericardiocentesis under echocardiographic navigation.     

"Hands-Free" continuous transthoracic monitoring of pericardiocentesis using a novel ultrasound transducer

BACKGROUND: Pericardiocentesis can be monitored with a hand-held transducer. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of monitoring pericardiocentesis using a novel ultrasound transducer, which can be attached to the chest wall, developed in our laboratory (CONTISON). METHODS: We studied nine patients with large pericardial effusions. The 2.5-MHz transducer is spherical in its distal part and mounted in an external housing to permit steering in 360 degrees. The external housing is attached to the chest wall using an adhesive patch. The CONTISON transducer was placed at the cardiac apex and an apical four-chamber view obtained. Pericardiocentesis was performed from the subcostal position. The pericardial effusion was continuously imaged. Mitral inflow velocity signals were recorded before and after pericardiocentesis. When fluid was first obtained, 50 mL of fluid were discarded after which 5 mL of agitated saline was injected through the needle. RESULTS: In the first patient the pericardiocentesis needle was seen in the left ventricular cavity. Saline injection produced a contrast effect in the left ventricle. The needle was gradually withdrawn until contrast was seen in the pericardial sac. A total of 1100 mL was removed without further complications. The second patient had clear fluid followed by blood stained aspirate. The echocardiogram revealed gradual appearance of granular echoes within the pericardial sac, suggestive of intrapericardial clot that was subsequently surgically evacuated. In the remaining seven patients, agitated saline produced a contrast effect in the pericardial sac indicative of proper needle position. Mitral flow velocity paradoxus was noted in five patients, and it resolved after pericardiocentesis in four patients. No adjustment of the transducer was required. CONCLUSION: The CONTISON transducer permitted continuous monitoring of pericardiocentesis. This technique could potentially facilitate pericardiocentesis.     

Diagnosis of pericardial effusion by computed tomography

We assessed the diagnostic utility of computed tomography (CT) in the detection of pericardial effusion by using a dog model in which the amount and type of pericardial fluid were controlled and by obtaining CT scans on patients with suspected pericardial effusion prior to pericardiocentesis. The experimental studies showed that CT was capable of detecting pericardial effusion composed of serous fluid or saline in amounts as small as 50 ml. However, the hemopericardium was radiographically isodense with the heart and difficult to detect by CT unless the epicardial fat pad was identified or intravenous contrast enhancement of the heart was used. CT clearly demonstrated the presence of pericardial effusion in all six patients studied prior to successful pericardiocentesis or pericardiectomy. We conclude that CT is a sensitive noninvasive method which can be used for the diagnosis of pericardial effusion.     

Electrocardiographic voltage in pericardial effusion.

The usefulness of the electrocardiographic sign of "low voltage" in the diagnosis of pericardial effusion was investigated in 122 patients comprising three study groups. Sixty-four patients (group 1) had a pericardial effusion detected and measured by echocardiographic studies. The volume of the effusion showed no correlation with electrocardiographic voltage. A second group of 36 patients was identified as having low voltage on routine electrocardiograms. Only 13 (36 percent) had echocardiographically demonstrable pericardial effusion. Group 3 consisted of 22 patients who required pericardiocentesis. The ECGs obtained immediately after pericardiocentesis showed an increase in average voltage of 0.48 mm in the limb leads and 0.83 mm in the precordial leads for each 100 ml of fluid removed. This study demonstrates that a single ECG with "low voltage" is not useful in the diagnosis of pericardial effusion but that a reduction in the voltage of serial ECGs may suggest the development of pericardial effusion.     

Pericardial mesothelioma presenting as constrictive pericarditis

A 46-year-old woman underwent pericardiocentesis and pericardial window for recurrent pericardial effusion. She presented 17 months later with signs and symptoms consistent with constrictive pericarditis. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging revealed an infiltrative mass surrounding the pericardium. A transcutaneous core needle biopsy of the pericardium confirmed the diagnosis of pericardial mesothelioma.     

Pericardial effusion and tamponade

Pericardial effusion may occur as a result of a variety of clinical conditions, including viral, bacterial, or fungal infections and inflammatory, postinflammatory, autoreactive, and neoplastic processes. More common causes of pericardial effusion and tamponade include malignancy, renal failure, viral and bacterial infectious processes, radiation, aortic dissection, and hypothyroidism. It can also occur after trauma or acute myocardial infarction (as in postpericardiotomy syndrome following cardiac or thoracic surgery) or as an idiopathic pericardial effusion. Although pericardial effusion is common in patients with connective tissue disease, cardiac tamponade is rare. Among medical patients, malignant disease is the most common cause of pericardial effusion with tamponade. Table 1 shows the causes of pericardial tamponade. The effusion fluid may be serous, suppurative, hemorrhagic, or serosanguineous. The pericardial fluid can be a transudate (typically occurring in patients with congestive heart failure) or an exudate. The latter type, which contains a high concentration of proteins and fibrin, can occur with any type of pericarditis, severe infections, or malignancy. Once the diagnosis of pericardial effusion has been made, it is important to determine whether the effusion is creating significant hemodynamic compromise. Asymptomatic patients without hemodynamic compromise, even with large pericardial effusions, do not need to be treated with pericardiocentesis unless there is a need for fluid analysis for diagnostic purposes (eg, in acute bacterial pericarditis, tuberculosis, and neoplasias). The diagnosis of pericardial effusion/tamponade relies on a strong clinical suspicion and is confirmed by echocardiography or other pericardial imaging modalities. Alternatively, when the diagnosis of cardiac tamponade is made, there is a need for emergency drainage of pericardial fluid by pericardiocentesis or surgery to relieve the hemodynamic compromise. Following pericardiocentesis, it is necessary to prevent recurrence of tamponade. Intrapericardial injection of sclerosing agents, surgical pericardiotomy, and percutaneous balloon pericardial window creation are techniques used to prevent reaccumulation of pericardial fluid and recurrence of cardiac tamponade.     

Pericardiocentesis Guided by Contrast Echocardiography

Although pericardiocentesis is a relatively safe procedure, there are some hazards, particularly when hemorrhagic fluid is aspirated. Having the opportunity to outline the space from which the fluid is withdrawn is of particular interest in this situation. A current technique of echocardiography with contrast enhancement involves injection of a few milliliters of agitated saline solution or reinjection of blood-stained fluid. Performing this procedure, we repeatedly observed a weak and inhomogeneous echo contrast; therefore, we evaluated the applicability of the ultrasound contrast medium SH U 454 (Echovist Schering, Berlin, Germany) for contrast enhancement in hemorrhagic pericardiocentesis. In all patients, pericardiocentesis was performed in a supine position by a subxiphoid approach. A Teflon catheter / needle unit attached to a syringe containing a few milliliters of contrast medium was introduced in the usual way. On the return of hemorrhagic fluid, 1–2 ml of Echovist was injected to provide contrast from the space from which it had been aspirated. We observed excellent contrast clearly outlining the pericardial space through the injection of 1–2 ml of contrast medium. No adverse or side effects were seen resulting from Echovist injection to the pericardial sac. In conclusion, contrast echocardiography appears to be a useful tool to secure the correct position of the needle during pericardiocentesis of hemorrhagic or loculated effusions. It is suggested that injection of Echovist should be considered whenever the contrast obtained by the conventional technique is poor and inconclusive.     

Pericardiocentesis guided by a pulse generator

This study was performed to compare pericardiocentesis guided by a pacing current applied through the pericardiocentesis needle with the traditional method of monitoring ST segment elevation from the needle tip electrogram. ST segment elevation was measured at 3 mm from the epicardium, after epicardial contact, after epicardial penetration and again at 3 mm from the epicardium after epicardial penetration. Two millivolts of ST segment elevation gave the highest combined positive (86%) and negative (79%) predictive value for epicardial contact by the pericardiocentesis needle between the two groups with the largest difference: 3 mm from the epicardium before contact and after epicardial penetration. Therefore, ST segment monitoring cannot reliably determine the point of epicardial contact. To determine the optimal stimulus strength for pulse generator-guided pericardiocentesis, pacing studies were performed using 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 mA unipolar stimulus strengths. The pacing studies were performed both with and without a hemodynamically significant pericardial effusion to determine if increased pericardial pressure altered the pacing threshold. A 4 mA unipolar cathodal stimulus was chosen because it captured the ventricle only with direct contact of the epicardium. Ten dogs were instrumented and cardiac tamponade produced so that a subxiphoid approach to the epicardium with the pacing needle electrode could be attempted. During pericardiocentesis, needle tip electrograms were recorded, alternating with pacing attempts using a 4 mA unipolar stimulus. In all 10 dogs, the effusion was entered and epicardium was contacted as indicated by capture. No myocardial perforation or coronary artery or venous injuries were produced. These findings support the use of a pulse generator to guide pericardiocentesis.     

Novel use of a disposable digital pressure transducer to increase the safety of pericardiocentesis

Cardiac tamponade represents a medical emergency necessitating emergent pericardiocentesis. Use of two‐dimensional echocardiography (ECHO) has improved the safety of pericardiocentesis, but procedural challenges may occur when performed in an emergent manner outside of the catheterization laboratory without availability of fluoroscopy and readily available pressure transducers. The most problematic situation is the initial finding of bloody fluid on aspiration where intrapericardial versus intravascular location of the needle must be determined. We report two cases of cardiac tamponade managed with the use of a novel, disposable lightweight digital pressure transducer to directly measure intrapericardial pressures during an ECHO guided pericardiocentesis. In both cases the fluid initially encountered was grossly bloody and rapid definition of whether this was pericardial fluid versus an inappropriately located needle in the vascular space was critical. This type of novel, disposable self contained manometer has the potential to further minimize complications associated with pericardiocentesis. It offers a cost effective alternative and answers questions about the shifting point of service for pericardiocentesis from the invasive cath lab to less costly locations (Drummond, et al., J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1998;11:433–435). © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.