ArticleEuropean heart journal. Case reports2025
Post-infarct effusive-constrictive pericarditis with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device: a case report.
Article in European heart journal. Case reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Effusive-constrictive pericarditis (ECP) is a condition where acute pericarditis causes a pericardial effusion and stiffening of the pericardium, which can result in haemodynamic instability due to compression of right-sided cardiac chambers. Here, we present a patient with cardiac tamponade followed by ECP complicating treatment of acute myocardial infarction/cardiogenic shock supported with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device (PVAD). Case summary: A 65-year-old male presented with an anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. The left anterior descending artery was stented, and a PVAD was placed. The patient was haemodynamically unstable, and the PVAD had frequent suction alarms at higher flow rates. Pulsus paradoxus was noted on the arterial line tracing. Echocardiography showed a large pericardial effusion, which was drained with improvement in cardiac output. However, the patient soon worsened again with continued PVAD suction alarms, and this time echocardiography demonstrated constrictive physiology. The patient was treated with anti-inflammatory medications with improvement in haemodynamics. The PVAD was able to be weaned, and the patient was discharged in stable condition. Discussion: Effusive-constrictive pericarditis is a syndrome exhibiting the physiology of both cardiac tamponade and constrictive pericarditis. Effusive-constrictive pericarditis should be considered in patients whose haemodynamics do not improve after pericardiocentesis. This patient had a PVAD placed, which relies on left ventricular preload to increase cardiac output. The numerous suction alarms encountered during this patient's intensive care unit course were likely due to ECP decreasing preload.
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.