Key result
Idiopathic recurrent pericarditis linked to ~5-fold higher hospitalization rate versus secondary etiology.
Why the study?
The study aimed to characterize the clinical and demographic profile, disease course, and real-world management of patients with recurrent pericarditis and specific patient subgroups using data from the RUDRA registry.
Cohort (n=120)
Yes
Real-world registry data from Russia and Kazakhstan reveal that idiopathic recurrent pericarditis carries a more severe clinical course and higher hospitalization burden than RP of known etiology, while highlighting substantial underutilization of guideline-recommended colchicine and interleukin-1 inhibitors.
Idiopathic recurrent pericarditis may warrant closer monitoring; Level 4 data leaves open etiology-specific prognostic models.
Aim . To identify the clinical and demographic profile, disease course, and management of patients with recurrent pericarditis (RP) based on data from the retrospective branch of the RUDRA registry, and to analyze specific patient subgroups. Material and methods . RUDRA (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT06517966) is an international, multicenter, non-interventional real-world practice registry organized by the Eurasian Association of Internal Medicine, involving 20 centers across 14 regions of the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan. The retrospective cohort included men and women aged 18 years and older with a verified diagnosis of RP established within the previous 10 years. Patient enrollment was conducted from September 30, 2024, to July 31, 2025. Statistical data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 25. Results. The retrospective branch of the RUDRA registry included 120 patients. Idiopathic recurrent pericarditis (IRP) was verified in 33,3% (n=40), while RP of established etiology was identified in 66,7% (n=80). The median age was 63,0 [50,0;73,0] years; 55,0% were female. Patients with IRP were characterized by a significantly larger volume of pericardial effusion (386 [200;600] vs 200 [100;500] ml; p=0,008), a higher frequency of pericardial strands, clots, and adhesions (40,0% vs 11,4%; p=0,002), as well as higher rates of hospitalization (43,8% vs 9,1%; p<0,001) and disability duration (41,5 [24,2;45,8] vs 0 [0;18,5] days; p=0,024). Regarding anti-inflammatory therapy for RP, colchicine was used in 35,3% of cases overall, being significantly more frequent in the IRP group (70,0% vs 17,1%; p<0,001). Systemic glucocorticoids were prescribed to 28,4% of patients. Interleukin-1 inhibitors were received by only 2,6% of patients. Conclusion . The retrospective branch of the RUDRA registry has provided the first systematized data on real-world clinical practice in the management of patients with RP in the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan. IRP was characterized by a more severe clinical course, a higher social burden, and predominantly medication-induced remission. A significant gap between clinical guidelines and real-world practice was identified, specifically regarding the insufficient use of colchicine in RP of known etiology and the critically low availability of interleukin-1 inhibitors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arutyunov et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Recurrent pericarditis (n=120). Idiopathic recurrent pericarditis vs. Recurrent pericarditis of established etiology was evaluated on Hospitalization rate (p=<0.001). Idiopathic recurrent pericarditis had higher hospitalization (43.8% vs 9.1%; p<0.001) and larger effusions (386 vs 200 ml; p=0.008) than established etiology RP.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: