Why the study?
Does pericardial drainage compared to repeat pericardial tap improve control of pericardial effusion in patients with malignant pericardial tamponade?
Population
27 patients with malignant pericardial tamponade seen in a single Medical Center over a 10-year period
Comparison
Pericardial drainage (surgical or percutaneous) vs Repeat pericardial tap
Design
Case_series
Authors
Loading...
Drainage may offer better sustained control than repeat taps in malignant tamponade; hypothesis-generating from small case series and should not change practice.
Does pericardial drainage compared to repeat pericardial tap improve control of pericardial effusion in patients with malignant pericardial tamponade?
In patients with malignant pericardial tamponade, immediate percutaneous or surgical drainage provides better sustained control of effusion compared to repeat pericardial taps.
Rinkevich et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: