Key result
Neoplastic pericardial effusion is linked to a ~5-fold higher long-term mortality versus idiopathic etiology.
Why the study?
While procedural safety of percutaneous pericardiocentesis has improved over time, data on long-term outcomes in cancer patients remain limited.
Does neoplastic etiology increase long-term mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous pericardiocentesis for severe pericardial effusion compared to non-neoplastic etiologies?
Observational (n=179)
No
Does neoplastic etiology increase long-term mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous pericardiocentesis for severe pericardial effusion compared to non-neoplastic etiologies?
Percutaneous pericardiocentesis is procedurally safe across etiologies, but patients with neoplastic pericardial effusion have a markedly higher long-term mortality driven by their underlying malignancy.
AIMS: Percutaneous pericardiocentesis is the standard diagnostic and therapeutic procedure for severe pericardial effusion (PE). While its procedural safety has improved over time, data on long-term outcomes in cancer patients remain limited. We aim to evaluate clinical outcomes after pericardiocentesis, with a specific focus on neoplastic-related PE. METHODS: We collected data of patients who underwent percutaneous pericardiocentesis at the University Hospital of Modena, between December 2006 and September 2025. Patients were stratified into three groups: neoplastic, idiopathic, and other specific etiologies. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, while the secondary endpoint was a composite of in-hospital adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients were included (median age 72, 39.7% women). Major procedural-related complications occurred in 4.5% of patients, while in-hospital mortality was 15.6%. During a mean follow-up of 15.8 months, 44.1% of patients died. Mortality was significantly higher in patients with neoplastic PE (61.1%) compared with those with other etiologies (44.9%) and idiopathic PE (23.4%, p = 0.001). Neoplastic etiology was independently associated with an increased risk of death compared with idiopathic PE (aHR 5.22, 95% CI 2.41-11.35). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that percutaneous pericardiocentesis is an effective and safe procedure, with a major complication rate consistent with contemporary series across variable etiologies. Despite similar procedural safety, patients with neoplastic PE experienced markedly worse long-term outcomes linked to the underlying malignancy rather than the procedure itself. In oncological patients, pericardiocentesis should be contextualized within the overall oncological trajectory, balancing procedural benefit with patient prognosis and individual treatment goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vitolo et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Severe pericardial effusion (n=179). Neoplastic pericardial effusion vs. Idiopathic pericardial effusion was evaluated on All-cause mortality (aHR 5.22, 95% CI 2.41-11.35, p=<0.001). Neoplastic etiology of pericardial effusion was independently associated with a significantly increased risk of long-term all-cause mortality compared with idiopathic effusion (aHR 5.22).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: