ArticleHerz2018
Cytopathology of pericardial effusions : Experience from a tertiary center of cardiology.
Article in Herz, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role ofPeerJ · 2025Article
- Constrictive pericarditis caused by pericardial metastasis from esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a case report.International cancer conference journal · 2022Article
- The Value of Cytology in the Evaluation of Malignant Pericardial Effusions: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Application of the international system for reporting serous fluid cytopathology on reporting various body fluids; experience of a tertiary care hospital.CytoJournal · 2022Article
- Pericardial Disease Associated with Malignancy.Current cardiology reports · 2018Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPericardial effusion (PE) is a common clinical condition that can develop as a result of systemic or cardiac diseases. Here, we report the results of cytology for patients who underwent pericardiocentesis for PE.
methodsThe study comprised 283 patients who underwent primary percutaneous pericardiocentesis between 2007 and 2016. The mean age of the patients was 60.0 ± 16.6 years; 162 (57.2%) were male and 121 (42.8%) were female. The presence of reactive mesothelial cells, acute and chronic inflammatory cells, and/or blood without evidence of malignant cells was considered as benign. The presence of malignant cells with/without reactive mesothelial cells, inflammatory cells, and/or blood was considered as malignant.
resultsThe vast majority of PE specimens (219 cases; 77.4%) were classified as benign. Only 20 cases (7.1%) were classified as atypical, and malignant cells were present in the PE specimens of 44 cases (15.5%). The most common diagnosis was benign PE. The most commonly encountered malignancy was lung cancer. The rate of malignancy was 1.9% in the serous group and 24% in the hemorrhagic group, which was statistically significant.
conclusionBenign PE was the most frequent cytological diagnosis in our study. Chronic nonspecific pericarditis was the most frequent type of pericarditis in the benign PE group, while lung adenocarcinoma was the most frequent malignancy in the malignant PE group. The rate of malignancy was significantly higher in the hemorrhagic group than in the serous group.
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.