ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2021
Fifteen-year experience with pericardiectomy at a tertiary referral center.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pericardiectomy for Constrictive and Recurrent Pericarditis: State of the Art Update.Current cardiology reports · 2026Review
- Lessons From a Complex Case of Calcific Constrictive Pericarditis: A Case Report.Case reports in cardiology · 2025Article
- Proprioceptors of the human pericardium.Basic research in cardiology · 2024Article
- Anesthesia management for pericardiectomy- a case series study.BMC anesthesiology · 2023Article
- Constrictive Pericarditis: A Diagnostic Conundrum.Cureus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePericardiectomy has traditionally carried relatively high perioperative mortality and morbidity, with few published reports of intermediate- and long- term outcomes. We investigated our 15-year experience performing pericardiectomy at our institution.
methodsRetrospective study of all patients who underwent pericardiectomy at our institution between 2005 and 2019. Baseline demographics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes including long-term survival were analyzed.
resultsSixty-three patients were included in the study. 66.7% of subjects underwent isolated pericardiectomy while 33.3% underwent pericardiectomy concomitantly with another cardiac surgical procedure. The most common indications for pericardiectomy were constrictive (79.4%) and hemorrhagic (9.5%) pericarditis. Preoperatively, 76.2% of patients were New York Heart Association class II and III, while postoperatively, 71.4% were class I and II. One-, three-, five-, and ten- year overall mortality was 9.5, 14.3, 20.6, and 25.4%, respectively. Overall pericarditis recurrence rate was 4.8%.
conclusionPericardiectomy carries relatively high overall mortality rates, which likely reflects underlying disease etiology and comorbidities. Patients with prior cardiac intervention, history of dialysis, and immunocompromised state are associated with worse outcomes.
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.