ArticleBMC pediatrics2026
Recent trends of pericardiocentesis in pediatric population.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPericardiocentesis serves both diagnostic and life-saving purposes across a range of clinical scenarios. Despite its importance, there remain limited data regarding the effectiveness and safety of pericardiocentesis in the clinical setting, particularly in the pediatric population. This study aimed to investigate the recent trends in pericardiocentesis among pediatric patients in a tertiary referral center and to determine the factors associated with clinical outcomes, including recurrence requiring repeat intervention.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed clinical data of patients who underwent pericardiocentesis for clinically significant pericardial effusion (PE) from January 2003 to December 2023.
resultsA total of 68 pericardiocentesis procedures were performed for 58 pediatric patients (32 males and 26 females). The median age of patients was 6.4 years at the time of pericardiocentesis (interquartile range [IQR]: 2.3–12.4 years). Post-pericardiotomy syndrome, malignancy-related PE, and iatrogenic effusions associated with invasive procedures accounted for over 70% of all cases requiring pericardiocentesis. The majority of the patients had large-volume PE. The subxiphoid approach was used in most cases (77.9%). Three major complications (4.4%) were observed, including one requiring surgical intervention (pneumothorax with pneumopericardium). The other two were cases of pericardial decompression-related cardiac failure that were managed conservatively. Repeat intervention was required in seven patients within six months of the initial procedure. The absence of indwelling drainage catheter placement was associated with a significantly increased risk of recurrence requiring repetitive intervention (OR 115.0, p < 0.001, Fisher’s exact test).
conclusionsIn this cohort, most pericardiocentesis procedures were performed for post-pericardiotomy syndrome, malignancy-related PE and iatrogenic complications associated with invasive procedures at a tertiary referral children’s hospital. Pericardiocentesis appeared to be a safe and effective procedure for significant PE and was feasible, including in neonates.
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.