ArticlePloS one2022
Percutaneous pericardial catheter drainage for symptomatic uremic pericardial effusions with narrow safety margins.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPercutaneous pericardial catheter drainage (PCD) for pericardial effusion is generally known to be limited by the high risk associated with effusions that are less than 10 mm thick. The objective was to report cases who underwent percutaneous PCD for symptomatic uremic pericardial effusions, which were less than 10 mm thick after cardiologist declined to perform the PCDs because of the narrow safety margins. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirteen consecutive cases (11 patients) (median age, 56 years, range, 31-83) with symptomatic uremic pericardial effusion (thickness <10 mm) affecting the pericardial space anterior to the right ventricle underwent ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous PCD between September 2015 and April 2022. Information regarding the clinical criteria, echocardiographic features, PCD details, nature of effusion, and outcomes, including success and complications were retrospectively evaluated.
resultsPigtail catheter (8.5-Fr) insertion was successful for all patients, with a median procedure time of 7 minutes (range 4~12) without procedure-related complications. The median amount of drainage on the day of PCD was 700 mL (range, 250-1100). The median duration of catheter indwelling was 5 days (range, 1~32). In one case, the catheter was removed after 1 day due to chest pain. For all patients, pericardial effusion evacuation was achieved with relief of associated symptoms, representing 100% clinical success.
conclusionPercutaneous PCD may be safely performed for patients with symptomatic uremic pericardial effusions and narrow safety margins of less than 10 mm.
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.