ArticleHerz2020
Clinical characteristics and prognosis of cardiac tamponade patients: 5‑year experience at a tertiary center.
Article in Herz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Is pulmonary hypertension protective against cardiac tamponade? A systematic review.Internal and emergency medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Cardiac tamponade.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2023Review
- Anagrelide-induced pericardial effusion in a patient with essential thrombocythemia.Clinical case reports · 2023Article
- The Prognostic Impact of Pericardial Fluid Cytology in Malignant Pericardial Effusion.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2023Article
- Pericardial Effusion during Proton Therapy in a Patient with Chemorefractory Hodgkin Lymphoma.International journal of particle therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiac tamponade (CT) is characterized by compression of the cardiac chambers due to pericardial fluid accumulation. The etiology and prognosis may vary in different regions, and thus patient series from various regions can be useful for exploring the etiological and prognostic disparities. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics of patients with imminent CT, to evaluate the diagnostic performance of biochemical, microbiologic, and pathologic laboratory analysis, and to ascertain the prognosis of CT patients.
methodsWe enrolled all patients with imminent CT who underwent percutaneous pericardiocentesis between July 2012 and December 2017 in this retrospective study. The patients were classified into three etiology groups: (a) malignancy (MRCT); (b) iatrogenic/mechanical complication of myocardial infarction (IMCT); and (c) other causes (OCT). Clinical information, laboratory findings, and survival data were recorded.
resultsIn total, 186 pericardiocentesis procedures were performed on 153 consecutive patients with CT. The median follow-up was 137 days (range: 1-1937). The MRCT group had the highest mortality rate (79%) in 12 months, while the OCT group had the lowest rate (27%). We determined that increased age, higher serum urea levels, and malignancy-related CT were independent predictors of mortality. The mortality rates of the MRCT and IMCT groups were similar, with both of them being significantly higher than the rate of the OCT group. In all, 15 patients were diagnosed with a new malignancy via pericardial fluid cytology.
conclusionPatients in the MRCT and IMCT groups had a poor prognosis. The presence of malignancy was found to be the most powerful predictor of mortality in CT patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30470911What 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.