|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2002; 39:2000-2004 © 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |

* Clinical Laboratory MedicineKochi, Japan
Department ofGeriatric Medicine, Kochi Medical School, Kochi, Japan
Manuscript received November 6, 2001; revised manuscript received March 5, 2002, accepted March 27, 2002.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Yoshihiro Kudo, Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Kochi Medical School, Kohasu Oko-cho Nankoku City, Kochi, Japan 783-8505.
kudohy{at}med.kochi-ms.ac.jp
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical correlates of PR-segment depression among consecutive asymptomatic patients with pericardial effusion (PE) detected by routine echocardiography.
BACKGROUND: Pericardial effusion is a relatively common finding in clinical practice, but not many studies have evaluated electrocardiographic (ECG) changes associated with the occurrence of PE.
METHODS: Among 4,061 consecutive patients referred to our echocardiography laboratory, 176 asymptomatic patients had PE correlated with their clinical history and ECG findings.
RESULTS: PR-segment depression was detected in 40 patients (23%). There were no significant differences in age, gender distribution or heart rate between patients with and without PR-segment depression. Fifteen post-pericardiotomy patients (33%), 19 patients (40%) with malignant disease and 6 patients (46%) with connective tissue disease had PR-segment depression, whereas no patient with heart disease (dilated cardiomyopathy, hypertensive heart disease, old myocardial infarction, valvular heart disease), renal disease or hypothyroidism had PR-segment depression, nor widespread ST-segment elevation. Among 40 patients with PR-segment depression, 8 had ST-segment elevation in the leads of epicardial derivation, 8 had upright T waves, 20 had low to inverted T waves with an isoelectric ST-segment and 4 had ST-Twave changes due to bundle branch block.
CONCLUSIONS: PR-segment depression was a relatively common ECG sign associated with clinically silent PE, and it was an ECG indicator of inflammatory pericardial involvement.
| ||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |