ArticleOpen heart2026
Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic pericardioperitoneal window.
Article in Open heart, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent pericardial effusion remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge due to high recurrence rates. Laparoscopic pericardioperitoneal window represents an understudied method in the management of pericardial effusion and is a minimally invasive technique that allows continuous drainage, achieving symptomatic improvement with minimal recurrence.
methodsWe conducted a single-centre prospective study between 2022 and 2024, including patients with recurrent pericardial effusion requiring surgical intervention. A pericardioperitoneal window was created via laparoscopy for all patients. Clinical outcomes, complications and recurrence rates were assessed over a 12-month follow-up period.
results24 patients were included, and all patients tolerated the surgical procedure well. The surgery was technically successful in all patients, resulted in direct symptomatic improvement and none experienced postoperative complications. Postoperative drainage was not needed, and patients were discharged the next day. 12-month follow-up revealed no clinical or radiological signs of recurrence.
conclusionsLaparoscopic pericardioperitoneal window appears to be a safe, effective and durable alternative for patients with recurrent pericardial effusion. However, larger randomised controlled trials are required for further assessment of safety and long-term 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.