ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025
Computerized tomography angiography in diagnosing an obtuse marginal branch perforation after pericardiocentesis: a case report.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pericardiocentesis is both therapeutic and diagnostic invasive procedure, guided by echocardiography and/or angiography. It can be done using subcostal or apical approach. One of the major complications of pericardiocentesis is coronary artery laceration with an incidence of less than 1%. Diagnosis of such lacerations is often made by invasive coronary angiography or urgent thoracotomy. Computed tomography angiography is used to determine the extent of bleeding and hemopericardium, but its potential for detailed evaluation of bleeding site is somewhat underestimated. Case presentation: We present a rare case of distal obtuse marginal (OM) artery perforation resulting from apical pericardiocentesis that was diagnosed with CT angiography (CTA) further treated with coronary guidewire particle embolization. A 49-year-old male patient who had undergone ascending aorta and aortic arch reconstruction after an aortic dissection Type A was evaluated with echocardiography before being discharged from our hospital. A loculated pericardial effusion was identified, necessitating pericardiocentesis. The clinical course was further complicated by hemopericardium due to coronary laceration. The hemorrhage was managed with coronary guidewire segment embolization which led to immediate improvement in hemodynamic status. The patient was discharged seven days after intervention. Conclusion: Coronary artery perforation is a rare, albeit life-threatening complication of pericardiocentesis that requires urgent surgical or percutaneous intervention. CTA can provide important diagnostic information on perforation location and help in deciding whether embolization or open-heart surgery is needed to address ongoing bleeding.
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.