Comparison of Pericardiocentesis in Post-Cardiac Surgery and Nonsurgical Patients with Pericardial Tamponade

Abstract

Introduction:There are several approaches for pericardiocentesis. However, there is no definite suggestion about puncture location after cardiac surgery. The purpose of this study is to examine whether there is any difference regarding puncture location during pericardiocentesis in postoperative cardiac tamponade comparing to nonsurgical cardiac tamponade. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who had undergone pericardiocentesis from August 2011 to December 2019. Patients were examined in two groups, nonsurgical and postsurgical, based on the etiology of pericardial tamponade. Clinical profiles, echocardiographic findings, and procedural outcomes were identified and compared. Results: Sixty-eight pericardiocenteses were performed in this period. The etiology of pericardial effusion was cardiac surgery in 27 cases and nonsurgical medical conditions in 41 cases. Baseline demographic variables were similar between the surgical and nonsurgical groups. Loculated effusion was more common in the postsurgical group (48.1\% vs. 4.9\%, P<0.001). Maximal fluid locations were different between the groupsright ventricular location was more common in the nonsurgical group (36.6\% vs. 11.1\%, P=0.02), while lateral location was more common in the postsurgical group (12.2\% vs. 40.7\%, P=0.007). Apical drainage was more frequently performed in the postsurgical group compared to the nonsurgical group (77.8\% vs. 53.7\%, P=0.044). Conclusion: Apical approach as a puncture location can be used more frequently than subxiphoid approach for effusions occurred after cardiac surgery compared to nonsurgical effusions. Procedural success is prominent in this group and can be the first choice of treatment.