ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Georgios P. Georghiou
Alon Stamler
Erez Sharoni
Marius Berman
Bernardo A. Vidne
Milton Saute
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Georghiou, G. P.
Right arrow Articles by Saute, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Georghiou, G. P.
Right arrow Articles by Saute, M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pericardium

Ann Thorac Surg 2005;80:607-610
© 2005 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons


Original article: Cardiovascular

Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Pericardial Window for Diagnosis and Management of Pericardial Effusions

Georgios P. Georghiou, MD a , Alon Stamler, MD a , Erez Sharoni, MD a , Suzana Fichman-Horn, MD b , Marius Berman, MD a , Bernardo A. Vidne, MD a , Milton Saute, MD a , *

a Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Campus, Petah Tiqwa, and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
b Institute of Pathology, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Campus, Petah Tiqwa, and Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

Accepted for publication February 23, 2005.

* Address reprint requests to Dr Saute, Thoracic Surgery Unit, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Campus, Petah Tiqwa 49100, Israel (Email: saute{at}netvision.net.il).


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Patients and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
BACKGROUND: Video-assisted thoracoscopy with the creation of a pericardial window is a noninvasive method of pericardial drainage. It also allows an excellent view of both the pleural cavity and pericardium and the precise selection of biopsy sites. We review our 3-year experience with this technique.

METHODS: Between January 2001 and February 2004, 18 patients (10 men, 8 women; mean age 57 years) with echocardiographically diagnosed pericardial effusion underwent video-assisted thoracoscopy at our center. Pericardial windows were created under general anesthesia and single-lung ventilation using 2 to 3 trocars. Mean operating time was 46 minutes. A right thoracic approach was used in 16 patients and a left thoracic approach in 2.

RESULTS: Microbiology and virology cultures of the pericardial fluid were negative. Histologic findings were compatible with tuberculosis in 2 cases and granulocytic sarcoma, infiltrating breast carcinoma, and infiltrating nonsmall cell carcinoma in 1 case each. In the remaining patients, the histologic diagnosis was chronic or subacute nonspecific pericarditis. Talc pleurodesis was performed in 3 patients for concomitant malignant pleural effusion. In 4 patients, the pericardial effusion occurred secondary to cardiac surgery; 3 were receiving anticoagulants after valve replacement, and 1 had a heart transplant. There were no complications of the thoracoscopy technique.

CONCLUSIONS: Video-assisted thoracoscopic fenestration is an effective technique for pericardial drainage and biopsy. Apart from its diagnostic value, it allows the physician to fashion a pleuropericardial window for effective drainage while avoiding the complications of classic surgical procedures. Concomitant pleural and pulmonary disorders may be managed simultaneously.


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Patients and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
Chronic or recurrent pericardial effusion is often related to underlying malignant disease, such as lung and breast cancer and malignant lymphoma [1]. However, 50% of pericardial effusions in patients with known malignancies are benign. As survival is significantly better for patients with nonmalignant than malignant effusions, tissue diagnosis is essential [2]. Furthermore, pericardial effusions may also be related to other etiologies requiring histologic or bacteriologic verification, such as infections, postirradiation sequelae, uremia, collagen vascular diseases, and myocardial infarction. Many patients have concurrent pleural pathology that requires the establishment of a pleuropericardial diagnosis [3–6]. Approximately half the patients with pericardial effusions present with symptoms of cardiac tamponade [7, 8]. In these cases, symptoms are relieved by pericardial decompression, irrespective of the underlying cause.

While percutaneous catheter drainage and balloon pericardiotomy are increasingly performed for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, recurrent or loculated effusions are best managed surgically with a pericardial window [2].

Subxiphoid pericardiotomy is a simple technique for the treatment of cardiac tamponade, but it allows for only limited pericardial resection because of its restricted access, and it is associated with a 2% to 10% relapse rate (depending on the etiology) [9–12]. Therefore, in high-risk patients, partial pericardiectomy by thoracotomy or median sternotomy may be preferable [11, 12]. Thoracotomy is more often followed by pulmonary complications and involves a longer postoperative hospitalization [11].

Video-assisted thoracoscopy combines the advantages of subxiphoid pericardiotomy and pericardiectomy. It is minimally invasive and permits exploration of the thoracic cavity; drainage is achieved by the creation of a pleuropericardial window. Since 2001, video-assisted thoracoscopic fenestration has been offered at our institute to patients with symptomatic pericardial effusion or effusion of unknown origin. This study focuses on the use of this method for effusions with or without concomitant pleural disease.


    Patients and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Patients and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
Between January 2001 and February 2004, 18 patients with pericardial effusions underwent video-thoracoscopic surgery at our center. The group consisted of 10 men and 8 women of mean age 57 years (range, 46 to 77). Symptoms included thoracic pain (n = 2), isolated dyspnea (n = 12), or pyrexia (n = 2). Two patients were clinically asymptomatic. We included only patients with echocardiographically documented malignant (n = 3) or benign idiopathic (n = 11) pericardial effusions requiring further diagnosis or relief of tamponade symptoms, or patients with persistent or recurrent effusions after percutaneous drainage (n = 4). None of the patients was hemodynamically compromised. Eleven patients had undergone prior pericardiocentesis that failed to control the effusive process. Three of the 4 patients after cardiac surgery (valve replacement) were receiving anticoagulants, and 1 had a heart transplant. The effusion was localized in 3 cases and diffuse in 1 case. Exclusion criteria for the study were echocardiographic or radiologic signs of constrictive pericarditis or blunt and penetrating chest trauma.

A computed tomography (CT) scan was performed to identify additional pleural pathology and to determine the predominant localization of the loculated pericardial effusions and concomitant findings at the pleura for planning the side of intervention. A single prophylactic dose of cephalosporin was given at the beginning of surgery. The procedure was performed in the lateral decubitus position under general anesthesia and double-lumen intubation. Trocars for the passage of the endoscopic camera and the various surgical instruments were introduced through 2 or 3 thoracic incisions of less than 10 mm at the level of the fourth and sixth intercostal spaces.

The pleural cavity and lung were examined first, and any pleural effusion was evacuated and sent for cytology. Pericardiocentesis was then performed under direct vision, and the fluid was collected for cytologic and microbiologic analysis (Fig 1A). After the phrenic nerve was identified (Fig 1B), a stab incision was usually created on the surface of the distended pericardium using electrocautery (Fig 1C). The pericardium was then grasped with endoscopic forceps and incised with curved endoscopic scissors. Loculations and septa were broken down, and the heart was circumferentially freed with a thoracoscopic suction device. A large pericardial window was created with careful protection of the phrenic nerve. A pericardial specimen was sent for histologic and microbiologic analysis. In the event of a combined malignant pericardial and pleural effusion, talc was applied under direct vision on the pleural dome, chest wall, and diaphragm, but not on the mediastinal part of the chest cavity. A chest drain was inserted into the cavity, through one of the port sites with no attempt to drain the pericardium. The patient was extubated and transferred to the recovery room for a few hours’ observation, and then returned to the ward on the same day. The chest tube or tubes were removed when the amount of daily drainage was less than 100 mL. Patient-controlled analgesia was provided postoperatively in all cases. Postoperative morbidity and duration of chest tube drainage and hospitalization were noted.



View larger version (107K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig 1. Video-assisted thoracoscopic pericardial window performed on the right side. (A) The phrenic nerve is visualized, and pericardiocentesis is performed under direct vision. (B) The pericardium is grasped with forceps. (C) A pericardial window is created, and pericardial fluid gushes out.

 
Patients were examined clinically and echocardiographically 3 months after surgery to check for the development of recurrent effusions. Eleven of the 15 patients with nonmalignant disease underwent a second echocardiography examination at a mean of 12 months after surgery (range, 6 to 18 months).


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Patients and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
Preoperative echocardiography revealed septations and loculations in 7 patients (39%). Additional pleural pathology consisting of effusions and thickening or irregularities was identified on CT scan in 9 patients (50%).

The preoperative examinations combined with the postoperative results confirmed the presence of malignancy in 3 patients, including 1 with myelofibrosis. In 11 patients, there was no evidence of neoplasia. In the remaining 4 patients, all with septations and loculations, the pericardial effusion occurred as a complication of cardiac surgery. The average interval between cardiac surgery and pericardial drainage was 24 days (range, 7 to 44). Three of our patients were receiving anticoagulation treatment before the procedure, which may have contributed to the formation of the effusions.

Sixteen surgical procedures (89%) were performed on the right side and 2 (11%) on the left. Routine microbiology and virology cultures of the pericardial fluid were negative in all cases. Histologic biopsy findings were compatible with tuberculosis in 2 cases (11%) and with granulocytic sarcoma (the patient with myelofibrosis), infiltrating breast carcinoma, and infiltrating nonsmall cell carcinoma in 1 case each (5%). In the remaining patients, the histologic diagnosis was chronic or subacute nonspecific pericarditis. Additional talc pleurodesis was performed in 3 patients (17%) with malignant pleural effusion.

Mean operating time was 46 minutes and ranged from 30 to 60 minutes. There were no intraoperative complications. Mean duration of postoperative chest tube drainage was 2.3 days (range, 1 to 5), and of hospitalization, 6.4 days (range, 3 to 16). Hospital stays longer than 3 days were related to the underlying disease (malignancy) and not to the procedure. A single postoperative complication was noted in 1 patient and consisted of supraventricular arrhythmia related to a chest tube that moved into the pericardium. The arrhythmia resolved spontaneously after removal of the drain. There was no treatment-related 30-day mortality; however, 1 patient (5%) died of progression of malignancy (lung cancer). At the 3-month postoperative follow-up, symptoms were alleviated in all surviving patients. Echocardiography showed no recurrent pericardial effusion, even in the patients who underwent talc pleurodesis for concomitant malignant pleural effusion. Eleven of the 15 patients with nonmalignant disease underwent a second echocardiography examination at a mean of 12 months after surgery (range, 6 to 18 months). None showed recurrent pericardial effusion.


    Comment
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Patients and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 
Symptomatic pericardiac effusions are common and may result from a variety of causes. When medical treatment has failed to control the effusion or a diagnosis is needed, surgical intervention is required.

Various approaches have been described for the diagnostic and therapeutic assessment of pericardial disease, including pericardiocentesis, percutaneous catheter drainage and balloon pericardiotomy, subxiphoid pericardial drainage, pericardioperitoneal shunt, subxiphoid pericardial fenestration, and pericardial window through anterior thoracotomy/thoracoscopy. Although researchers agree that constrictive pericarditis is best treated with pericardiectomy through a sternotomy, the optimal drainage procedure for nonconstricting effusions is still controversial, and varies according to individual needs and circumstances [2].

Pericardial fenestration by video-assisted thoracoscopy was introduced in order to gain simultaneous access to the pleural and pericardial regions and to treat loculated pericardial effusions under direct vision [3–6, 13–16]. Our results indicate that the technique is well suited for these purposes. It provided us an excellent view of the pleural cavity and the pericardium in all cases, so that all suspicious sites, whether pericardial, pleural, lung, or mediastinal, could be precisely localized for biopsy. This diagnostic advantage had important implications in our series. Apart from the pericardial biopsies and cytologic examination of pericardial fluid that established a firm diagnosis in 5 patients, biopsy of the pleural and pulmonary nodules revealed the presence of carcinoma in 2 others.

The procedure was also technically and therapeutically advantageous: the surgical approach was less traumatic than for anterior thoracotomy, and a more extensive pericardial resection was possible compared with the subxiphoid route [17]. Furthermore, better visualization was afforded than with the subxiphoid approach. Loculated effusions, even those located posteriorly that cannot normally be reached without open thoracotomy, were easily drained. Furthermore, 50% of our patients had an additional pathologic finding in one pleural cavity on the CT scan, which we were able to treat in the same operative session. In one third of them (n = 3), a malignant pleural effusion was noted during thoracoscopy and treated by talc pleurodesis after pericardial fenestration was completed. This group, like the rest of the sample, showed no recurrence of the effusion, radiographically or echocardiographically, at the 3-month follow-up. Indeed, the incidence of recurrence may be lower for thoracoscopy because a larger window of pericardium can be excised than through the subxiphoid route [12]. Piehler and associates [12] suggested a direct relationship between the extent of pericardium resected and the incidence of recurrence or development of constriction. They, therefore, advocated complete pericardiectomy instead of the subxiphoid resection. Using video-assisted thoracoscopy, we could also avoid the subxiphoid (adhesion) route in the patients with delayed tamponade after heart surgery. For our whole sample, the operative time (mean, 45 minutes) was comparable with subxiphoid drainage [9], and the method was cost effective in that no expensive single-use materials were required. We did not observe infections in any of our patients.

It should be noted that video-assisted thoracoscopy is contraindicated for patients with tamponade or altered respiratory function in whom one-lung ventilation or the lateral operative position is necessary. In these circumstances, subxiphoid drainage remains the method of choice in patients with hemodynamic compensation. Furthermore, in the setting of malignancies, pericardial effusions develop in some cases as a near-terminal event. In this group of patients, the simplest method of relieving the effusion should be used. The subxiphoid procedure can be performed with local anesthesia. Our patient with malignant effusion secondary to lung cancer may have been representative of patients with a short expected life span and with little hope of effective treatment for their malignancy.

During the period of the study, 2 patients in our department with malignant effusions underwent subxiphoid pericardiectomy. The subxiphoid route was selected because of the presence of advanced malignancy, the patient’s poor health, and a limited expected life span. One patient showed little hemodynamic benefit and died within 10 days. The other patient died 2 months after the procedure. Video-assisted pericardiectomy has been our preferred approach for patients with malignant effusions who can be expected to respond to oncologic treatment (eg, breast cancer), or who appear likely to enjoy a prolonged survival, or those with benign effusions.

In conclusion, although video-assisted thoracoscopy with the creation of a pericardial window requires general anesthesia and single-lung ventilation, it is a safe, minimally invasive technique that allows for effective pericardial drainage, especially for loculated effusions, accurate biopsies, and effusions with concomitant pleural disease. We suggest that it should be used in carefully selected patients with proper indications. Future prospective randomized trials are needed to compare video-assisted thoracoscopic pericardiectomy to subxiphoid pericardiectomy.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Patients and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 References
 

  1. Parks JS, Rentschler R, Wilbur E. Surgical management of pericardial effusion in patients with malignancies Cancer 1991;67:76-80.[Medline]
  2. Moores DWO, Dzjuban SW. Pericardial drainage procedures Chest Surg Clin North Am 1995;5:359-373.[Medline]
  3. Mack MJ, Landreneau RJ, Hazelrigg SR, Acuff TE. Video-thoracoscopic management of benign and malignant pericardial effusions Chest 1993;103:390-393.
  4. Liu HP, Chang CH, Lin PJ, Hsieh HC, Chang SP, Hsieu MJ. Thoracoscopic management of effusive pericardial diseaseindications and technique. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;58:1695-1697.[Abstract]
  5. Nataf P, Cacoub P, Regan M, et al. Video-thoracoscopic pericardial window in the diagnosis and treatment of pericardial effusions Am J Cardiol 1998;82:125-126.
  6. Robles R, Pinero A, Lujan JA, et al. Thoracoscopic partial pericardiectomy in the diagnosis and management of pericardial effusion Surg Endosc 1997;11:253-256.[Medline]
  7. Press OW, Livingston R. Management of malignant pericardial effusion and tamponade JAMA 1987;257:1088-1092.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Vaitkus PT, Herrmann HC, LeWinter MM. Treatment of malignant pericardial effusion JAMA 1994;272:59-64.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Dosios T, Theakos N, Angouras D, Asimacopoulos P. Risk factors affecting the survival of patients with pericardial effusion submitted to subxiphoid pericardiotomy Chest 2003;124:242-246.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Moores DW, Allen KB, Faber LP, et al. Subxiphoid pericardial drainage for pericardial tamponade J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;109:546-552.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Naunheim KS, Kesler KA, Fiore AC, et al. Pericardial drainagesubxiphoid vs transthoracic approach. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1991;55:99-104.
  12. Piehler JM, Pluth JR, Schaff HV, Danielson GK, Orszulak TA, Puga FJ. Surgical management of effusive pericardial disease. Influence of extent of pericardial resection on clinical course J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1985;90506–6.
  13. Canto A, Guijarro R, Arnau A, et al. Thoracoscopic pericardial fenestrationdiagnostic and therapeutic aspects. Thorax 1993;48:1178-1180.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Furrer M, Hopi M, Ris HB. Isolated primary chylopericardiumtreatment by thoracoscopic duct ligation and pericardial fenestration. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996;112:1120-1121.[Free Full Text]
  15. Geissbühler K, Leiser A, Fuhrer J, Ris HB. Video-assisted thorascopic pericardial fenestration for loculated or recurrent effusions Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1998;14:403-408.
  16. Inderbitzi R, Furrer M, Leupi I. Pericardial biopsy and fenestration Eur Heart J 1993;14:135-137.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Hazelrigg SR, Mack MJ, Landreneau RJ, Acuff TE, Seifert PE, Auer JE. Thoracoscopic pericardiectomy for effusive pericardial disease Ann Thorac Surg 1993;56:792-795.[Abstract]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
LupusHome page
Y Kamata, M Iwamoto, Y Aoki, Y Kishaba, T Nagashima, H Nara, T Kamimura, A Tanaka, T Yoshio, H Okazaki, et al.
Massive intractable pericardial effusion in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus treated successfully with pericardial fenestration alone
Lupus, November 1, 2008; 17(11): 1033 - 1035.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
F. F. Tuon
Video-Assisted Thoracoscopy and Tuberculous Pericarditis
Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 2006; 81(6): 2338 - 2338.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
G. Rocco, A. La Rocca, C. La Manna, F. Scognamiglio, M. D'Aiuto, R. Jutley, and N. Martucci
Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery pericardial window
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., April 1, 2006; 131(4): 921 - 922.
[Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Georgios P. Georghiou
Alon Stamler
Erez Sharoni
Marius Berman
Bernardo A. Vidne
Milton Saute
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Georghiou, G. P.
Right arrow Articles by Saute, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Georghiou, G. P.
Right arrow Articles by Saute, M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pericardium


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS