-
American Journal of Respiratory and... Oct 2018This Guideline, a collaborative effort from the American Thoracic Society, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society of Thoracic Radiology, aims to provide...
BACKGROUND
This Guideline, a collaborative effort from the American Thoracic Society, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society of Thoracic Radiology, aims to provide evidence-based recommendations to guide contemporary management of patients with a malignant pleural effusion (MPE).
METHODS
A multidisciplinary panel developed seven questions using the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes) format. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach and the Evidence to Decision framework was applied to each question. Recommendations were formulated, discussed, and approved by the entire panel.
RESULTS
The panel made weak recommendations in favor of: 1) using ultrasound to guide pleural interventions; 2) not performing pleural interventions in asymptomatic patients with MPE; 3) using either an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) or chemical pleurodesis in symptomatic patients with MPE and suspected expandable lung; 4) performing large-volume thoracentesis to assess symptomatic response and lung expansion; 5) using either talc poudrage or talc slurry for chemical pleurodesis; 6) using IPC instead of chemical pleurodesis in patients with nonexpandable lung or failed pleurodesis; and 7) treating IPC-associated infections with antibiotics and not removing the catheter.
CONCLUSIONS
These recommendations, based on the best available evidence, can guide management of patients with MPE and improve patient outcomes.
Topics: Catheters, Indwelling; Conservative Treatment; Drainage; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Humans; Interdisciplinary Communication; Male; Pleural Effusion, Malignant; Pleurodesis; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Prognosis; Radiography, Thoracic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index; Societies, Medical; Talc; Thoracentesis; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30272503
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201807-1415ST -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Oct 2019To estimate the procedure-related risk of miscarriage after amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS) based on a systematic review of the literature and an... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To estimate the procedure-related risk of miscarriage after amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS) based on a systematic review of the literature and an updated meta-analysis.
METHODS
A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library was carried out to identify studies reporting complications following CVS or amniocentesis. Eligible for inclusion were large controlled studies reporting data for pregnancy loss prior to 24 weeks' gestation. Study authors were contacted when required to identify additional necessary data. Data for cases that had an invasive procedure and controls were inputted into contingency tables and the risk of miscarriage was estimated for each study. Summary statistics based on a random-effects model were calculated after taking into account the weighting for each study included in the systematic review. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage was estimated as a weighted risk difference from the summary statistics for cases and controls. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the similarity in risk levels for chromosomal abnormality between the invasive-testing and control groups. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic. Egger's bias was estimated to assess reporting bias in published studies.
RESULTS
The electronic search yielded 2943 potential citations, from which 12 controlled studies for amniocentesis and seven for CVS were selected for inclusion in the systematic review. A total of 580 miscarriages occurred following 63 723 amniocentesis procedures, resulting in a weighted risk of pregnancy loss of 0.91% (95% CI, 0.73-1.09%). In the control group, there were 1726 miscarriages in 330 469 pregnancies with a loss rate of 0.58% (95% CI, 0.47-0.70%). The weighted procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis was 0.30% (95% CI, 0.11-0.49%; I = 70.1%). A total of 163 miscarriages occurred following 13 011 CVS procedures, resulting in a risk of pregnancy loss of 1.39% (95% CI, 0.76-2.02%). In the control group, there were 1946 miscarriages in 232 680 pregnancies with a loss rate of 1.23% (95% CI, 0.86-1.59%). The weighted procedure-related risk of miscarriage following CVS was 0.20% (95% CI, -0.13 to 0.52%; I = 52.7%). However, when studies including only women with similar risk profiles for chromosomal abnormality in the intervention and control groups were considered, the procedure-related risk for amniocentesis was 0.12% (95% CI, -0.05 to 0.30%; I = 44.1%) and for CVS it was -0.11% (95% CI, -0.29 to 0.08%; I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
The procedure-related risks of miscarriage following amniocentesis and CVS are lower than currently quoted to women. The risk appears to be negligible when these interventions were compared to control groups of the same risk profile. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Adult; Amniocentesis; Chorionic Villi Sampling; Chromosome Aberrations; Embryo Loss; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Prenatal Diagnosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 31124209
DOI: 10.1002/uog.20353 -
Hepatology International Dec 2022Human albumin infusion is effective for controlling systemic inflammation, thereby probably managing some liver cirrhosis-related complications, such as spontaneous... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Human albumin infusion is effective for controlling systemic inflammation, thereby probably managing some liver cirrhosis-related complications, such as spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatic encephalopathy (HE), and hepatorenal syndrome. However, its clinical benefits remain controversial.
METHODS
EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding use of human albumin infusion in cirrhotic patients were eligible. Mortality and incidence of liver cirrhosis-related complications were pooled. Effect of human albumin infusion on mortality was also evaluated by subgroup analyses primarily according to target population and duration of human albumin infusion treatment. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
RESULTS
Forty-two RCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed that human albumin infusion could significantly decrease the mortality of cirrhotic patients (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.67-0.98, p = 0.03). Subgroup analyses showed that human albumin infusion could significantly decrease the mortality of cirrhotic patients with SBP (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.20-0.64, p = 0.0005) and HE (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.22-0.85, p = 0.02), but not those with ascites or non-SBP infections or undergoing large-volume paracentesis. Short-term human albumin infusion treatment could significantly decrease short-term mortality (OR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.50-0.89, p = 0.005), but not long-term mortality. Long-term human albumin infusion treatment could not significantly decrease long-term mortality (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.48-1.08, p = 0.11). In addition, human albumin infusion could significantly decrease the incidence of renal impairment (OR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.45-0.88, p = 0.007) and ascites (OR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.25-0.81, p = 0.007), but not infections or gastrointestinal bleeding.
CONCLUSIONS
Human albumin infusion may improve the outcomes of cirrhotic patients. However, its indications for different complications and infusion strategy in liver cirrhosis should be further explored.
Topics: Humans; Ascites; Serum Albumin, Human; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Paracentesis; Hepatic Encephalopathy; Peritonitis; Liver Cirrhosis
PubMed: 36048318
DOI: 10.1007/s12072-022-10374-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2017During pregnancy, fetal cells suitable for genetic testing can be obtained from amniotic fluid by amniocentesis (AC), placental tissue by chorionic villus sampling... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
During pregnancy, fetal cells suitable for genetic testing can be obtained from amniotic fluid by amniocentesis (AC), placental tissue by chorionic villus sampling (CVS), or fetal blood. A major disadvantage of second trimester amniocentesis is that the results are available relatively late in pregnancy (after 16 weeks' gestation). Earlier alternatives are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and early amniocentesis, which can be performed in the first trimester of pregnancy.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to compare the safety and accuracy of all types of AC (i.e. early and late) and CVS (e.g. transabdominal, transcervical) for prenatal diagnosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (3 March 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 3 March 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials comparing AC and CVS by either transabdominal or transcervical route.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 16 randomised studies, with a total of 33,555 women, 14 of which were deemed to be at low risk of bias. The number of women included in the trials ranged from 223 to 4606.Studies were categorized into six comparisons: 1. second trimester AC versus control; 2. early versus second trimester AC; 3. CVS versus second trimester AC; 4. CVS methods; 5. Early AC versus CVS; and 6. AC with or without ultrasound.One study compared second trimester AC with no AC (control) in a low risk population (women = 4606). Background pregnancy loss was around 2%. Second trimester AC compared to no testing increased total pregnancy loss by another 1%. The confidence intervals (CI) around this excess risk were relatively large (3.2% versus 2.3 %, average risk ratio (RR) 1.41, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.00; moderate-quality evidence). In the same study, spontaneous miscarriages were also higher (2.1% versus 1.3%; average RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.52; high-quality evidence). The number of congenital anomalies was similar in both groups (2.0% versus 2.2%, average RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.39; moderate-quality evidence).One study (women = 4334) found that early amniocentesis was not a safe early alternative compared to second trimester amniocentesis because of increased total pregnancy losses (7.6% versus 5.9%; average RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.61; high-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (3.6% versus 2.5%, average RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.98; moderate-quality evidence), and a higher incidence of congential anomalies, including talipes (4.7% versus 2.7%; average RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.38; high-quality evidence).When pregnancy loss after CVS was compared with second trimester AC, there was a clinically significant heterogeneity in the size and direction of the effect depending on the technique used (transabdominal or transcervical), therefore, the results were not pooled. Only one study compared transabdominal CVS with second trimester AC (women = 2234). They found no clear difference between the two procedures in the total pregnancy loss (6.3% versus 7%; average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.23, low-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (3.0% versus 3.9%; average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.21; low-quality evidence), and perinatal deaths (0.7% versus 0.6%; average RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.51; low-quality evidence). Transcervical CVS may carry a higher risk of pregnancy loss (14.5% versus 11.5%; average RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.81), but the results were quite heterogeneous.Five studies compared transabdominal and transcervical CVS (women = 7978). There were no clear differences between the two methods in pregnancy losses (average RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.65; very low-quality evidence), spontaneous miscarriages (average RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.58; very low-quality evidence), or anomalies (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.12; low-quality evidence). We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low due to heterogeneity between studies. Transcervical CVS may be more technically demanding than transabdominal CVS, with more failures to obtain sample (2.0% versus 1.1%; average RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.82, moderate-quality evidence).Overall, we found low-quality evidence for outcomes when early amniocentesis was compared to transabdominal CVS. Spontaneous miscarriage was the only outcome supported by moderate-quality evidence, resulting in more miscarriages after early AC compared with transabdominal CVS (2.3% versus 1.3%; average RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.60). There were no clear differences in pregnancy losses (average RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.54; low-quality evidence), or anomalies (average RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.30; very low-quality evidence).We found one study that examined AC with or without ultrasound, which evaluated a type of ultrasound-assisted procedure that is now considered obsolete.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Second trimester amniocentesis increased the risk of pregnancy loss, but it was not possible to quantify this increase precisely from only one study, carried out more than 30 years ago.Early amniocentesis was not as safe as second trimester amniocentesis, illustrated by increased pregnancy loss and congenital anomalies (talipes). Transcervical chorionic villus sampling compared with second trimester amniocentesis may be associated with a higher risk of pregnancy loss, but results were quite heterogeneous.Diagnostic accuracy of different methods could not be assessed adequately because of incomplete karyotype data in most studies.
Topics: Amniocentesis; Chorionic Villi Sampling; Congenital Abnormalities; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Trimester, First; Pregnancy Trimester, Second; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28869276
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003252.pub2 -
Viruses Oct 2023Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a significant health concern affecting numerous expectant mothers across the globe. CMV is the leading cause of health problems and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a significant health concern affecting numerous expectant mothers across the globe. CMV is the leading cause of health problems and developmental delays among infected infants. Notably, this study examines CMV infection in pregnancy, its management, prevention mechanisms, and treatment options.
METHODS
Specifically, information from the Cochrane Library, PUBMED, Wiley Online, Science Direct, and Taylor Francis databases were reviewed along with additional records identified through the register, the Google Scholar search engine. Based on the search, 21 articles were identified for systematic review.
RESULTS
A total of six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were utilized for a meta-analytic review. As heterogeneity was substantial, the random effects model was used for meta-analysis. Utilizing the random-effects model, the restricted maximum likelihood (REML) approach, the estimate of effect size (d = -0.479, 95% CI = -0.977 to 0.019, = 0.060) suggests the results are not statistically significant, so it cannot be inferred that the prevention methods used were effective, despite an inverse relationship between treatment and number of infected cases. The findings indicated that several techniques are used to prevent, diagnose, and manage CMV infection during pregnancy, including proper hygiene, ultrasound examination (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), amniocentesis, viremia, hyperimmunoglobulin (HIG), and valacyclovir (VACV).
CONCLUSIONS
The current review has significant implications for addressing CMV infection in pregnancy. Specifically, it provides valuable findings on contemporary management interventions to prevent and treat CMV infection among expectant mothers. Therefore, it allows relevant stakeholders to address these critical health concerns and understand the effectiveness of the proposed prevention and treatment options.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant; Female; Humans; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Cytomegalovirus Infections; Amniocentesis; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical
PubMed: 38005820
DOI: 10.3390/v15112142 -
Gastroenterology Research and Practice 2014Introduction. Large volume paracentesis is considered a safe procedure carrying minimal risk of complications and rarely causing morbidity or mortality. The most common... (Review)
Review
Introduction. Large volume paracentesis is considered a safe procedure carrying minimal risk of complications and rarely causing morbidity or mortality. The most common complications of the procedure are ascitic fluid leakage, hemorrhage, infection, and perforation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate all hemorrhagic complications and their outcomes and to identify any common variables. Methods. A literature search for all reported hemorrhagic complications following paracentesis was conducted. A total of 61 patients were identified. Data of interest were extracted and analyzed. The primary outcome of the study was 30-day mortality, with secondary endpoints being achievement of hemostasis after intervention and mortality based on type of intervention. Results. 90% of the patients undergoing paracentesis had underlying cirrhosis. Three types of hemorrhagic complications were identified: abdominal wall hematomas (52%), hemoperitoneum (41%), and pseudoaneurysm (7%). Forty percent of the patients underwent either a surgical (35%) or an IR guided intervention (65%). Patients undergoing a surgical intervention had a significantly higher rate of mortality at day 30 compared to those undergoing IR intervention. Conclusion. Abdominal wall hematomas and hemoperitoneum are the most common hemorrhagic complications of paracentesis. Transcatheter coiling and embolization appear to be superior to both open and laparoscopic surgery in treatment of these complications.
PubMed: 25580114
DOI: 10.1155/2014/985141 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Feb 2023Cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA is detectable in the amniotic fluid collected by amniocentesis in cases in which the fetus has been infected. However, cases of congenital... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA is detectable in the amniotic fluid collected by amniocentesis in cases in which the fetus has been infected. However, cases of congenital neonatal CMV infection with a negative amniocentesis result have also been reported in the literature. The aim of the present study was to compare pregnancies with a negative amniocentesis result to those with a positive amniocentesis result in terms of incidence of fetal insult and long-term sequelae.
METHODS
Observational studies that included pregnant women with CMV infection who underwent amniocentesis and that reported their results together with neonatal and/or long-term outcomes of the offspring were included. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The rate of severe symptoms at birth, defined as neurological symptoms or multiorgan involvement at birth, and the rate of severe sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) and/or neurodevelopmental impairment at follow-up were the main outcomes of the study. The secondary outcome was the rate of pregnancy termination due to the presence of CMV-associated central nervous system (CNS) findings or multiorgan involvement on ultrasound/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled false-negative rate of amniocentesis was 8.0% (95% CI, 5.0-13.0%). The pooled rate of severe symptoms at birth was 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0-1.0%; I = 0%) in fetuses with a negative amniocentesis result and 22.0% (95% CI, 11.0-38.0%; I = 75%) in those with a positive amniocentesis result. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01-0.10; I = 0%). The pooled rate of severe SNHL and/or neurodevelopmental impairment at follow-up in fetuses with a negative amniocentesis result was 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0-1.0%; I = 0%) and, in those with a positive amniocentesis result, it was 14.0% (95% CI, 7.0-26.0%; I = 64%). The pooled OR was 0.04 (95% CI, 0.01-0.14; I = 0%). The pooled rate of pregnancy termination due to the presence of CMV-associated CNS findings or multiorgan involvement on ultrasound/MRI was 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0-2.0%; I = 0%) in fetuses with a negative amniocentesis result and 20.0% (95% CI, 10.0-36.0%; I = 82%) in those with a positive amniocentesis result. The pooled OR was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01-0.08; I = 0%). A subgroup analysis including only pregnancies with primary CMV infection and a sensitivity analysis including only prospective studies were carried out, showing very similar results to those of the main analysis.
CONCLUSION
A negative amniocentesis result in pregnant women with CMV infection ensures lack of fetal insult and long-term sequelae to the child, even if transmission has occurred. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Child; Pregnancy; Infant; Female; Humans; Amniocentesis; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious; Prospective Studies; Cytomegalovirus; Cytomegalovirus Infections; Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36412976
DOI: 10.1002/uog.26128 -
Cureus Jul 2022Ascites is the most common complication of liver cirrhosis. Midodrine is a vasoconstrictor that improves splanchnic and systemic hemodynamics, reduces ascites, and... (Review)
Review
Ascites is the most common complication of liver cirrhosis. Midodrine is a vasoconstrictor that improves splanchnic and systemic hemodynamics, reduces ascites, and improves clinical outcomes. Here, we aimed to examine the role of midodrine in cirrhosis-related ascites. Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and PubMed Central databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials comparing midodrine with other interventions in patients with cirrhotic ascites on November 25, 2020, using appropriate keywords like "midodrine", "ascitic cirrhosis", "peritoneal paracentesis" and suitable Boolean operators. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were used to analyze pool data as appropriate with a 95% confident interval (CI). A total of 14 studies were included in our analysis including 1199 patients. The addition of midodrine resulted in statistically significant improvement in mean arterial pressure (MAP) (MD, 3.95 mmHg; 95% CI, 1.53-6.36) and MELD (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease) score (MD, -1.27; 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.04) compared to standard medical treatment (SMT). There was also a significant improvement in plasma renin activity and plasma aldosterone concentration. However, there was no significant improvement in mortality or serum creatinine compared to SMT. In addition, there was no statistically significant improvement in MAP, plasma renin activity, plasma aldosterone concentration, MELD score, overall mortality, and paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction comparing midodrine with albumin. Midodrine alone leads to significant improvement in various clinical parameters in patients with cirrhotic ascites compared to standard medical care. At the same time, it was found to be non-inferior to albumin. Therefore, further well-designed studies need to be carried out on midodrine in addition to albumin for optimal clinical benefits among patients with ascites due to cirrhosis.
PubMed: 36060403
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.27483 -
BMJ Open Aug 2021To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) when... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of abdominal paracentesis drainage (APD) in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) when compared with conventional 'step-up' strategy based on percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OVID), China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang Database were electronically searched to collect cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to 25 July 2020. Studies related to comparing APD with conventional 'step-up' strategy based on PCD were included.
OUTCOMES
The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were the rate of organ dysfunction, infectious complications, hospitalisation expenses and length of hospital stay.
RESULTS
Five cohort studies and three RCTs were included in the analysis. Compared with the conventional 'step-up' method, pooled results suggested APD significantly decreased all-cause mortality during hospitalisation (cohort studies: OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.89 and p=0.02), length of hospital stay (cohort studies: standard mean difference (SMD) -0.31, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.10 and p=0.005; RCTs: SMD -0.45, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.26 and p<0.001) and hospitalisation expenses (cohort studies: SMD -2.49, 95% CI -4.46 to -0.51 and p<0.001; RCTs: SMD -0.67, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.44 and p<0.001). There was no evidence to prove that APD was associated with a higher incidence of infectious complications. However, the incidence of organ dysfunction between cohort studies and RCTs subgroup slightly differed (cohort studies: OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.28 and p=0.22; RCTs: OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.98 and p=0.04).
CONCLUSIONS
The findings suggest that early application of APD in patients with AP is associated with reduced all-cause mortality, expenses during hospitalisation and the length of stay compared with the 'step-up' strategy without significantly increasing the risk of infectious complications. These results must be interpreted with caution because of the limited number of included studies as well as a larger dependence on observational trials.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020168537.
Topics: Drainage; Hospitalization; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreatitis; Paracentesis
PubMed: 34373293
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045031 -
The American Journal of Cardiology May 2022Pericardial disease secondary to sarcoidosis is a rare clinical entity with no observational studies in previous research. Therefore, we evaluated reported cases of... (Review)
Review
Pericardial disease secondary to sarcoidosis is a rare clinical entity with no observational studies in previous research. Therefore, we evaluated reported cases of pericarditis because of sarcoidosis to further understand its diagnosis and management. We performed a systematic review of previous research until December 16, 2020 in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science. Case reports and case series demonstrating pericardial involvement in sarcoidosis were included. Fourteen reports with a total of 27 patients were identified. Dyspnea (82%) was the most common presentation, with the lungs being the primary site of sarcoidosis in most patients (77%). The most frequently encountered pericardial manifestations were pericardial effusion (89%), constrictive pericarditis and cardiac tamponade (48%). Management of these patients included use of corticosteroids (82%), colchicine (11%), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (7%). Similar to the general population, the most common intervention in these patients was pericardiocentesis (59%), pericardial window (30%), and pericardiectomy (19%). Overall, the majority of this population (70%) achieved clinical improvement during median follow-up time of 8 months. In conclusion, the prevalence and incidence of sarcoid-induced pericarditial disease remain unclear. Clinical manifestations of pericardial involvement are variable, though many patients present with asymptomatic pericardial effusions. No consensus exists on the treatment of this special population, but corticosteroids and combination therapies are considered first-line therapies because of their efficacy in suppressing pericardial inflammation and underlying sarcoidosis. Patients with refractory cases of pericarditis may also benefit therapeutically from the addition of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, colchicine, and/or biologics.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Colchicine; Humans; Pericardial Effusion; Pericardiectomy; Pericardiocentesis; Pericarditis; Pericarditis, Constrictive; Sarcoidosis
PubMed: 35227500
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.01.025