| Literature DB >> 30916130 |
Abdurrahim Colak1, Necip Becit1, Ugur Kaya1,2, Munacettin Ceviz1, Hikmet Kocak1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In this retrospective study, we aimed to observe the efficacy of pericardial effusion (PE) treatments by a survey conducted at the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Atatürk University.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30916130 PMCID: PMC6436775 DOI: 10.21470/1678-9741-2018-0077
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Cardiovasc Surg ISSN: 0102-7638
Symptoms of patients with pericardial effusion.
| Symptoms | Group A (n=480) | Group B (n=28) | Group C (n=45) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dyspnea | 372 (77.5%) | 22 (78.5%) | 36 (80%) |
| Chest pain | 218 (45.4%) | 13 (46.4%) | 27 (60%) |
| Tachycardia | 248 (51.6%) | 17 (60.7%) | 29 (64.4) |
| Edema | 152 (31.6%) | 11 (39.2%) | 21 (46.6%) |
| Fever | 123 (25.6%) | 8 (28.5%) | 11 (24.4%) |
| Orthopnoea | 102 (21.2%) | 9 (32.1%) | 14 (31.1%) |
| Abdominal respiration | 77 (16%) | 4 (14.2%) | 8 (17.7%) |
| Syncope | 17 (3.5%) | 1 (3.5%) | 3 (6.6%) |
| Cough | 116 (24.1%) | 11 (39.2%) | 19 (42.2%) |
| Jugular venous distension | 228 (47.5%) | 13 (46.4%) | 22 (48.8%) |
| Hypotension | 48 (10%) | 3 (10.7%) | 10 (22.2%) |
Fig. 1Marking the entry point with computerized tomography (CT).
Fig. 2Demonstration of the needle in the pericardial space.
Fig. 3Catheter in the ıntrapericardial area.
Fig. 4View of reduced intrapericardial liquid.
Causes of pericardial effusion.
| Cause of pericardial effusion | Group A | Group B | Group C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Uremic pericarditis | 208 (43.3%) | 2 (7.1%) | 10 (22.2%) |
| Idiopathic pericarditis | 92 (19.1%) | 10 (35.7%) | - |
| Tuberculosis pericarditis | 50 (10.4%) | - | 7 (15.5%) |
| Bacterial pericarditis | 24 (5%) | 1 (3.5%) | 8 (17.7%) |
| Trauma (operation, angioplasty comp. ) | 25 (5.2%) | 13 (46.4%) | 4 (8.8%) |
| Malignancy | 65 (13.5%) | 2 (7.1%) | 13 (28.8%) |
| Others | 16 (3.3%) | - | 3 (6.6%) |
| Total | 480 | 28 | 45 |
Comparison of the length of in-hospital stay and duration of the drainage tube stay between the groups.
| Group | Group | Mean | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitalization time | A | B | -103.199 | <0.05 |
| C | -88.938 | <0.05 | ||
| B | A | 103.199 | <0.05 | |
| C | 14.262 | 0.064 | ||
| C | A | 88.938 | <0.05 | |
| B | -14.262 | 0.064 | ||
| Drainage tube time | A | B | -13.327 | <0.05 |
| C | -15.431 | <0.05 | ||
| B | A | 13.327 | <0.05 | |
| C | -0.2103 | 0.634 | ||
| C | A | 15.431 | <0.05 | |
| B | 0.2103 | 0.634 |
Comparison of the results between the groups.
| Group A | Group B | Group C | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recurrent effusion | 45 (9.4%) | 2 (7.1%) | 7 (15.6%) | 0.365 |
| Construction | 14 (2.9%) | - | 1 (2.2%) | 0.638 |
| Complication | 5 (1%) | 1 (3.5%) | 1 (2.2%) | 0.425 |
| Drainage time | 3-15 (4.3±1.6) | 2-17 (5.6±3.6) | 2-15 (5.9±2.6) | <0.05 |
| Hospitalization time | 3-30 (5.57) | 7-30 (15.89) | 7-30 (14.46) | <0.05 |
| Mortality (first month) | 7 (1.4%) | 1 (3.5%) | 1 (2.2%) | 0.655 |
| Abbreviations, acronyms & symbols | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANOVA | = Analysis of variance | MRI | = Magnetic resonance imaging | |
| Ca | = Cancer | MVR | = Mitral valve replacement | |
| CRF | = Chronic renal failure | N2O | = Nitrous oxide | |
| CT | = Computerized tomography | O2 | = Oxygen | |
| CVP | = Central venous pressure | PAN | = Polyarteritis nodosa | |
| ECG | = Electrocardiogram | PCR | = Polymerase chain reaction | |
| ECHO | = Echocardiography | PE | = Pericardial effusion | |
| IV | = Intravenous | PPD | = Purified protein derivative | |
| LSD | = Least square difference | SLE | = Systemic lupus erythematosus | |
| MI | = Myocardial injury | SPSS | = Statistical Packet for Social Science | |
| Authors' roles & responsibilities | |
|---|---|
| AC | Conception and design of the work; revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published |
| NB | Conception and design of the work; revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published |
| UK | Conception and design of the work; revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published |
| MC | Conception and design of the work; revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published |
| HK | Conception and design of the work; revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published |