Chronic Pericardial Effusion: Causes and Management

Asymptomatic Chronic Large Pericardial Effusions: To Drain or to Observe?

Pericardial effusions, especially large ones, have traditionally been regarded with concern by clinicians due to the sometimes unpredictable development of life-threatening cardiac tamponade. In the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines on pericardial diseases, the simplified algorithm for pericardial effusion triage and management recommends pericardial drainage in cases of cardiac tamponade and/or suspicion of bacterial or neoplastic etiology. In the presence of acute pericarditis, empiric anti-inflammatory treatment should be given, while when a specific indication known to be associated with pericardial effusion is found, then treatment of the underlying cause is indicated. Notably, the most challenging subgroup of patients includes those with large, asymptomatic, C-reactive-protein-negative, idiopathic effusions. In the latter subjects, pericardial drainage is proposed in cases of chronic effusions (lasting more than three months). However, this recommendation is based on scant data stemming from small-sized non-randomized studies. Nevertheless, recent evidence in a larger cohort of patients pointed out that a watchful waiting strategy is a safe option in terms of complication-free survival. This review summarizes the contemporary evidence on this challenging topic and provides recommendations for tailoring individual patient treatments.

Prognostic Utility of Pericardial Effusion in the General Population: Findings From the STAAB Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The incidental finding of a pericardial effusion (PE) poses a challenge in clinical care. PE is associated with malignant conditions or severe cardiac disease but may also be observed in healthy individuals. This study explored the prevalence, determinants, course, and prognostic relevance of PE in a population-based cohort.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The STAAB (Characteristics and Course of Heart Failure Stages A/B and Determinants of Progression) cohort study recruited a representative sample of the population of Würzburg, aged 30 to 79 years. Participants underwent quality-controlled transthoracic echocardiography including the dedicated evaluation of the pericardial space. Of 4965 individuals included at baseline (mean age, 55±12 years; 52% women), 134 (2.7%) exhibited an incidentally diagnosed PE (median diameter, 2.7 mm; quartiles, 2.0-4.1 mm). In multivariable logistic regression, lower body mass index and higher NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) levels were associated with PE at baseline, whereas inflammation, malignancy, and rheumatoid disease were not. Among the 3901 participants attending the follow-up examination after a median time of 34 (30-41) months, PE was found in 60 individuals (1.5%; n=18 new PE, n=42 persistent PE). Within the follow-up period, 37 participants died and 93 participants reported a newly diagnosed malignancy. The presence of PE did not predict all-cause death or the development of new malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Incidental PE was detected in about 3% of individuals, with the vast majority measuring <10 mm and completely resolving. PE was not associated with inflammation markers, death, incident heart failure, or malignancy. Our findings corroborate the view of current guidelines that a small PE in asymptomatic individuals can be considered an innocent phenomenon and does not require extensive short-term monitoring.

Post-cardiac injury syndrome and pericardial effusion recurrence after pericardial effusion drainage in chronic idiopathic pericardial effusion

INTRODUCTION

The management of even large pericardial effusions in asymptomatic patients is still a matter of debate. Aim of the present study is to explore, in a multicenter setting, the rate of post-cardiac injury syndromes (PCIS) and pericardial effusion recurrence after pericardial effusion drainage procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a multicenter international retrospective study including a consecutive cohort of patients diagnosed with large, chronic and idiopathic pericardial effusions, prospectively evaluated from January 2003 to December 2021 who underwent a clinically indicated pericardial drainage procedure. Two separate end-points were recorded: 1) recurrence of pericardial effusion after drainage without any sign of pericardial inflammation 2) occurrence of PCIS, defined as the new onset of pericarditis 1 to 6 weeks after pericardial intervention.

RESULTS

124 patients were enrolled (50 % female, mean age 64 years old). A mean follow-up of 29.6 ± 25.6 months was obtained in 110 patients (88 %). 110 patients were treated with pericardiocentesis (89 %), 25 with pleuro-pericardial windows (20 %), and 1 with pericardiectomy (1 %). PCIS occurred in 21 out of 124 patients followed for at least 6 weeks (16.9%). Recurrence of pericardial effusion after drainage without any sign of pericardial inflammation occurred in 68 out of 110 patients at a longer follow-up (61.8 %). At multivariate analysis only inflammatory cells in pericardial fluid was associated with PCIS and pericardiocentesis with pericardial effusion recurrency.

CONCLUSION

Our data support the need of caution with the use of pericardiocentesis in asymptomatic patients with large pericardial effusion as it is often associated with pericardial effusion recurrence. Of interest the presence of inflammatory cells in the pericardial fluid is associated with PCIS after pericardial drainage procedures.

Small Left Ventricular Size Is a Risk Factor for Recurrent Pericardial Effusion after Percutaneous Drainage

Background: Significant pericardial effusion requires percutaneous drainage. Some patients experience recurrent pericardial effusion following index drainage, but its risk factors remain unknown. Such knowledge should further improve the clinical management of individuals presenting with pericardial effusion for risk stratification and the construction of therapeutic and management strategies beforehand. Methods: Patients who underwent percutaneous drainage for pericardial effusion between 2018 and 2023 were retrospectively included and were followed for 2 years or until November 2023. Baseline factors associated with recurrent pericardial effusion that required percutaneous drainage again were investigated to identify the high-risk cohort. Results: A total of 39 patients (83 years on median, 28 males) were included. During the 2-year observation period, 11 patients had the primary outcome. The left ventricular end-diastolic diameter at baseline was independently associated with the primary outcome with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.88 (95% confidence interval 0.80-0.97, p = 0.013) with a cutoff of 42 mm, which significantly stratified the cumulative incidence of the primary outcome (53% versus 10%, p = 0.011). Conclusions: Recurrent pericardial effusion after percutaneous drainage is not a rare phenomenon. A smaller left ventricular endo-diastolic diameter was an independent risk factor for recurrent pericardial effusion. The clinical implications of our findings in daily clinical practice should be validated in future prospective studies. Further studies are warranted to clarify the underlying causality between them.

Improvement of Symptoms and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Abnormalities in Patients with Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Cardiovascular Syndrome (PASC-CVS) after Guideline-Oriented Therapy

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) studies reported CMR abnormalities in patients with mild-moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggesting ongoing myocardial inflammation. Patients (n = 278, 43 ± 13 years, 70.5% female) with post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 cardiovascular syndrome (PASC-CVS) were included prospectively into the Vienna POSTCOV Registry between March 2021 and March 2023 (clinicaltrials.gov NCT05398952). Clinical, laboratory, and CMR findings were recorded. Patients with abnormal CMR results were classified into isolated chronic pericardial (with/without pleural) effusion, isolated cardiac function impairment, or both (myopericarditis) groups. Medical treatment included a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent (NSAID) for pericardial effusion and a condition-adapted maximal dose of heart failure (HF) treatment. Three months after medical therapy, clinical assessment and CMR were repeated in 82 patients. Laboratory analyses revealed normal hematological, inflammatory, coagulation, and cardiac biomarkers. CMR abnormalities were found in 155 patients (55.8%). Condition-adapted HF treatment led to a significant increase in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with initially reduced LVEF (from 49 ± 5% to 56 ± 4%, p = 0.009, n = 25). Low-moderate doses of NSAIDs for 3 months significantly reduced pericardial effusion (from 4/3;5.75/mm to 2/0;3/mm, median/interquartile ranges/p < 0.001, n = 51). Clinical symptoms improved markedly with a decrease in CMR abnormalities, which might be attributed to the maintenance of NSAID and HF medical treatment for PASC-CVS.