Agner R C, Gallis H A
Arch Intern Med. 1979 Apr;139(4):407-12. doi: 10.1001/archinte.139.4.407.
A retrospective analysis of 133 patients was performed to define the factors identifying those individuals at risk for the more serious causes of pericardial disease. In 90% of the cases, the initial assessment from data obtained without pericardiocentesis or pericardiectomy proved correct. Underlying tuberculous or maligant pericarditis were the most common sources of error on initial assessment. Hemodynamic compromise exclusive of anticoagulants, roentgenographic cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, low voltage on ECG, and large pericardial effusion by echocardiography were more common (P less than .05) in tuberculous pericarditis than in acute idiopathic pericarditis. We discuss similar risk factors in patients with chronic idiopathic, rheumatologic, and uremic pericarditis. Anterior pericardiectomy is favored as the diagnostic procedure of choice in patients at risk for the more serious causes of pericarditis because of greater safety, diagnostic sensitivity, and potential therapeutic benefit.
对133例患者进行回顾性分析,以确定那些有患更严重心包疾病风险的个体的识别因素。在90%的病例中,在未进行心包穿刺或心包切除术的情况下,根据所获数据进行的初步评估被证明是正确的。潜在的结核性或恶性心包炎是初步评估中最常见的错误来源。除抗凝剂外的血流动力学损害、X线胸片心脏增大、胸腔积液、心电图低电压以及超声心动图显示的心包大量积液,在结核性心包炎中比在急性特发性心包炎中更常见(P<0.05)。我们讨论了慢性特发性、风湿性和尿毒症性心包炎患者的类似危险因素。对于有患更严重心包炎风险的患者,前心包切除术因其更高的安全性、诊断敏感性和潜在的治疗益处,而被视为首选的诊断方法。