ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2015
Anterior parasternal approach for creation of a pericardial window.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Surgical Management Strategies for Pericardial Effusion-A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Asymptomatic Chronic Large Pericardial Effusions: To Drain or to Observe?Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Video-Assisted Thoracoscopy For Penetrating Cardiac Box Injury in Stable Patients.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2021Review
- Review
- Ultrasound-guided serratus plane block combined with intercostal block for a high-risk patient with pericardial tamponade: A case report.Annals of cardiac anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe optimal method for creation of a pericardial window (PW) is still controversial and it remains a surgical challenge, mainly in obese patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel approach that has not been described previously, for creation of a PW in patients with symptomatic, chronic, large pericardial effusion.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed the records of 30 patients (14 men, 16 women) who underwent a PW procedure between 2001 and 2011. The mean age was 63 years (standard deviation [SD]: 17 years, median: 60 years, range: 27-90 years) and the mean body mass index was 34 kg/m(2) (SD: 2 kg/m(2)). The operation was performed through a curvilinear parasternal approach, 6-8 cm in length, followed by a mini-thoracotomy between ribs 4 and 5. Discharged patients were followed up clinically.
resultsThe mean operative time was 73 minutes (SD: 21 minutes) and a median of 658 ml (range: 300-1,500 ml) of fluid was evacuated. The main aetiologies were idiopathic in 17 patients (57%) and malignant in 9 (30%). Seven patients (23%) died in hospital owing to underlying malignancy. Postoperative complications included mild renal failure (20%), respiratory failure (20%), pneumonia (13%), atrial fibrillation (10%) and atelectasis (6%). There were no wound infections. The median length of stay following the procedure was 8 days. In a median follow-up period of 3.8 years, 16 patients with non-malignant effusion were free of recurrence of pericardial effusion.
conclusionsThe anterior parasternal approach for creation of a PW is simple, safe and efficacious, and results in long-term symptomatic improvement, specifically in patients with non-malignant effusions. This approach may be more appealing in obese patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.