Cargando…

Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion

BACKGROUND: Echocardiographic signs of constrictive physiology (CP) after pericardiocentesis are frequently observed in malignancy patients. The purpose of the current study was to explore whether features of CP after pericardiocentesis have prognostic impact in malignancy patients with pericardial...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cho, In-Jeong, Chang, Hyuk-Jae, Chung, Hyemoon, Lee, Sang-Eun, Shim, Chi Young, Hong, Geu-Ru, Ha, Jong-Won, Chung, Namsik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4686385/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26691279
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145461
_version_ 1782406430830100480
author Cho, In-Jeong
Chang, Hyuk-Jae
Chung, Hyemoon
Lee, Sang-Eun
Shim, Chi Young
Hong, Geu-Ru
Ha, Jong-Won
Chung, Namsik
author_facet Cho, In-Jeong
Chang, Hyuk-Jae
Chung, Hyemoon
Lee, Sang-Eun
Shim, Chi Young
Hong, Geu-Ru
Ha, Jong-Won
Chung, Namsik
author_sort Cho, In-Jeong
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Echocardiographic signs of constrictive physiology (CP) after pericardiocentesis are frequently observed in malignancy patients. The purpose of the current study was to explore whether features of CP after pericardiocentesis have prognostic impact in malignancy patients with pericardial effusion (PE). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 467 consecutive patients who underwent pericardiocentesis at our institution from January 2006 to May 2014. Among them, 205 patients with advanced malignancy who underwent comprehensive echocardiography after the procedure comprised the study population. Co-primary end points were all-cause mortality (ACM) and repeated drainage (RD) for PE. Patients were divided into four subgroups according to cytologic result for malignant cells and CP (positive cytology with negative CP, both positive, both negative, and negative cytology with positive CP). RESULTS: CP after pericardiocentesis was present in 106 patients (50%) at median 4 days after the procedure. During median follow-up of 208 days, ACM and RD occurred in 162 patients (79%) and 29 patients (14%), respectively. Cox regression analysis revealed that independent predictors for ACM were male gender and positive cytology (all, p < 0.05). For RD, predictors were positive cytology, the absence of cardiac tamponade, and negative CP after pericardiocentesis (all, p < 0.05). When the patients were divided into four subgroups, patients with negative cytology and positive CP demonstrated the most favorable survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.39, p = 0.005) and the lowest RD rates (HR: 0.07, p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: CP after pericardiocentesis is common, but does not always imply poor survival or the need for RD in patients with advanced malignancies. On the contrary, the presence of CP in patients with negative cytology conferred the most favorable survival and the lowest rate of RD. Comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation for CP after pericardiocentesis would be helpful for predicting prognosis in patients with advanced malignancies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4686385
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46863852016-01-07 Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion Cho, In-Jeong Chang, Hyuk-Jae Chung, Hyemoon Lee, Sang-Eun Shim, Chi Young Hong, Geu-Ru Ha, Jong-Won Chung, Namsik PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Echocardiographic signs of constrictive physiology (CP) after pericardiocentesis are frequently observed in malignancy patients. The purpose of the current study was to explore whether features of CP after pericardiocentesis have prognostic impact in malignancy patients with pericardial effusion (PE). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 467 consecutive patients who underwent pericardiocentesis at our institution from January 2006 to May 2014. Among them, 205 patients with advanced malignancy who underwent comprehensive echocardiography after the procedure comprised the study population. Co-primary end points were all-cause mortality (ACM) and repeated drainage (RD) for PE. Patients were divided into four subgroups according to cytologic result for malignant cells and CP (positive cytology with negative CP, both positive, both negative, and negative cytology with positive CP). RESULTS: CP after pericardiocentesis was present in 106 patients (50%) at median 4 days after the procedure. During median follow-up of 208 days, ACM and RD occurred in 162 patients (79%) and 29 patients (14%), respectively. Cox regression analysis revealed that independent predictors for ACM were male gender and positive cytology (all, p < 0.05). For RD, predictors were positive cytology, the absence of cardiac tamponade, and negative CP after pericardiocentesis (all, p < 0.05). When the patients were divided into four subgroups, patients with negative cytology and positive CP demonstrated the most favorable survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.39, p = 0.005) and the lowest RD rates (HR: 0.07, p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: CP after pericardiocentesis is common, but does not always imply poor survival or the need for RD in patients with advanced malignancies. On the contrary, the presence of CP in patients with negative cytology conferred the most favorable survival and the lowest rate of RD. Comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation for CP after pericardiocentesis would be helpful for predicting prognosis in patients with advanced malignancies. Public Library of Science 2015-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC4686385/ /pubmed/26691279 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145461 Text en © 2015 Cho et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cho, In-Jeong
Chang, Hyuk-Jae
Chung, Hyemoon
Lee, Sang-Eun
Shim, Chi Young
Hong, Geu-Ru
Ha, Jong-Won
Chung, Namsik
Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion
title Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion
title_full Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion
title_fullStr Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion
title_full_unstemmed Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion
title_short Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion
title_sort differential impact of constrictive physiology after pericardiocentesis in malignancy patients with pericardial effusion
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4686385/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26691279
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145461
work_keys_str_mv AT choinjeong differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT changhyukjae differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT chunghyemoon differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT leesangeun differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT shimchiyoung differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT honggeuru differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT hajongwon differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion
AT chungnamsik differentialimpactofconstrictivephysiologyafterpericardiocentesisinmalignancypatientswithpericardialeffusion