Impact of Controlled Pericardial Drainage on Critical Cardiac Tamponade With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection

Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Japanese Red Cross Kobe Hospital, 1-3-1 Wakihama-kaigandori Chuo-ku, Kobe, Japan 651-0073. .
Circulation (Impact Factor: 14.43). 09/2012; 126(11 Suppl 1):S97-S101. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.082685
Source: PubMed


Cardiac tamponade is associated with fatal outcomes for patients with acute type A aortic dissection, and the presence of cardiac tamponade should prompt urgent aortic repair. However, treatment of the patient with critical cardiac tamponade who cannot survive until surgery remains unclear. We analyzed our experience of controlled pericardial drainage (CPD) managing critical cardiac tamponade.
Between September 2003 and May 2011, 175 patients with acute type A aortic dissection were treated surgically, including 43 (24.6%) who presented with cardiac tamponade on arrival. Eighteen patients, who did not respond to intravenous volume resuscitation, underwent CPD in the emergency department. An 8F pigtail drainage catheter was inserted percutaneously, and drainage volume was controlled by means of several cycles of intermittent drainage to maintain blood pressure at ≈90 mm Hg. After CPD, all of the patients were transferred to the operating room, and immediate aortic repair was performed. Systolic blood pressure before CPD was 64.3±8.2 mm Hg and elevated significantly in all of the cases after CPD. Systolic blood pressure after CPD was 94.8±10.5 mm Hg, and increase in systolic pressure was 30.5±11.7 mm Hg. Total volume of aspirated pericardial effusion was 40.1±30.6 mL, and 10 patients required only ≤30-mL aspiration volume. All of the patients underwent aortic repair successfully. In-hospital mortality was 16.7%; however, there was no complications or mortality related to CPD.
Preoperative pericardial drainage with control of volume is a safe and effective procedure for acute type A aortic dissection complicated by critical cardiac tamponade. In our patient population, timely controlled pericardial drainage is warranted.

Full-text preview

Available from:
  • Source
    • "It has been noted that cardiac tamponade, occurring in about 10% of AAD, signals a higher risk of death as it happened in this patient [6] [8]. It is well known that in patients with aortic dissection and cardiac tamponade, routine pericardial drainage is contraindicated (must go for surgery) as it may increase the leak or rupture by restoring blood pressure, which then increases the tear and the driving pressure of the leak, thereby increasing mortality [10]. In the recent American guidelines, limited pericardiocentesis is advised to restore perfusion in patients with hemopericardium and cardiac tamponade who cannot survive until surgery or if the patient in cardiac arrest [6]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pericarditis with pericardial effusion in acute coronary syndrome is seen in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction specifically when infarction is anterior, extensive, and Q wave. It is very uncommon to have pericardial effusion in a patient with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. We present an elderly hypertensive patient who was diagnosed as non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction with pericardial effusion that turned out to be acute aortic dissection with catastrophic end. We conclude that, in patients with suspected diagnosis of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina, if pericardial effusion is detected on echocardiography, aortic dissection needs to be considered.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2013

  • No preview · Article · May 2013 · Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Penn classification, a risk assessment system for acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD), is based on preoperative ischemic conditions. We investigated whether Penn classes predict outcomes after surgery for AAAD. Three hundred fifty-one patients with DeBakey type I AAAD treated surgically, January 1997 to January 2011, were divided into 4 groups per Penn class: Aa (no ischemia, n = 187), Ab (localized ischemia with branch malperfusion, n = 67), Ac (generalized ischemia with circulatory collapse, n = 46), and Abc (localized and generalized ischemia, n = 51). Early and late outcomes were compared between groups. In-hospital mortality was 3% (6 of 187) for Penn Aa, 6% (4 of 67) for Penn Ab, 17% (8 of 46) for Penn Ac, and 22% (11 of 51) for Penn Abc. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed Penn classes Ac and Abc, operation time >6 hours, and entry in the descending thoracic aorta to be risk factors for in-hospital mortality. Incidences of neurologic, respiratory, and hepatic complications differed between groups. Five-year cumulative survival was 85% in the Penn Aa group, 74% in the Penn Ab group (p = 0.027 vs Penn Aa), 78% in the Penn Ac group, and 67% in the Penn Abc group (p <0.001 vs Penn Aa). In conclusion, morbidity and mortality are high in patients with generalized ischemia. The Penn classification appears to be a useful risk assessment system for AAAD, predictive of outcomes.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2014 · The American journal of cardiology
Show more