Advertisement

Click here for more guidelines.

 
 




CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 1986; 7:307-314
© 1986 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Smiseth, O.
Right arrow Articles by Tyberg, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Smiseth, O.
Right arrow Articles by Tyberg, J.

Assessment of pericardial constraint: the relation between right ventricular filling pressure and pericardial pressure measured after pericardiocentesis

OA Smiseth, MA Frais, I Kingma, AV White, ML Knudtson, JM Cohen, DE Manyari, ER Smith, and JV Tyberg

Experimental studies have shown that right ventricular filling pressure (that is, intracavitary diastolic pressure) approximates pericardial surface pressure but, in many patients after removal of pericardial effusion, right ventricular filling pressure has been found to markedly exceed pericardial pressure recorded by an open catheter. The aim of this study was to determine whether this apparent contradiction was related to the technique of pericardial pressure measurement. Nine patients with chronic pericardial effusion were studied and, although these pressures diverged to varying degrees in individual patients, the previous observation was confirmed in that, although initially similar, right ventricular filling pressure and pericardial pressure (measured by means of an open catheter) tended to diverge during removal of the effusate; when the evacuation was as complete as possible pericardial pressure was 2.1 +/- 1.0 (mean +/- SE), while right ventricular filling pressure was 8.7 +/- 1.7 mm Hg (p less than 0.01). In six open chest, anesthetized, volume-loaded dogs with pericardial effusion (50 ml), right ventricular filling pressure and pericardial pressures measured with both open catheter and flat balloon were all equal. With decreasing volume of pericardial fluid, right ventricular filling pressure and pericardial pressure (by catheter) diverged as had been observed in patients. However, pericardial pressure (balloon) continued to be equal to right ventricular filling pressure. (With 0 ml in the pericardium, right ventricular filling pressure = 12.9 +/- 0.9 mm Hg, pericardial pressure [catheter] = 1.4 +/- 1.9 mm Hg and pericardial pressure [balloon] = 12.4 +/- 1.5 mm Hg.) Thus, these observations support the use of right ventricular filling pressure as an estimate of pericardial constraint in patients.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol.Home page
D. R. Hamilton, R. Sas, and J. V. Tyberg
Atrioventricular nonuniformity of pericardial constraint
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, October 1, 2004; 287(4): H1700 - H1704.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
W. E. Johnston, J. Vinten-Johansen, A. C. McGivor, W. P. Santamore, S. M. Block, and K. P. Moulton
Efficacy of Intravascular Volume Resuscitation in Dogs with Acute Cardiac Tamponade
Ann. Thorac. Surg., June 1, 1988; 45(6): 667 - 673.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Intern MedHome page
A. S. Manolis, P. Varriale, and R. M. Ostrowski
Hypothyroid Cardiac Tamponade
Arch Intern Med, June 1, 1987; 147(6): 1167 - 1169.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J Intensive Care MedHome page
J. D. Thomas and M. M. LeWinter
Pericardial Disease in the Intensive Care Setting
J Intensive Care Med, January 1, 1987; 2(1): 33 - 48.
[Abstract] [PDF]



 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement