Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for January, 2020

Pericardial effusion is often detected in patients with Infective endocarditis. Incidence can be as high as 25% . Most often it is mild, can be moderate in few.

Mechanism

  1. Sympathetic effusion in response to endocardial infection. It’s never more than minimal. (Evidence ? it’s only an assumption)
  2. IE related cardiac failure (Raised systemic venous pressure to which pericardial veins drain)
  3. Local sepsis, Abcess formation tracks to pericardial space through transmural lymphatics
  4. Fungal , granulomatous , Tuberculous IE (Rare) Here IE and PE  share the same pathology
  5. Part of systemic sepsis activated Immune mechanism (Polyseroists)
  6. Renal Involvement of IE-Renal failure
  7. Postoperative pericardial effusion in Prosthetic valve IE (Common, often loculated)

Clinical Implication

  • If the pericardial effusion is more than mild, it often denotes worse outcome. This implies more extensive infection or a marker of extracardiac causes of effusion like renal dysfunction.
  • Effusion may predispose to local dissemination of infection and ends up as peri-annular abscess is whether it is a cause or effect of effusion remains to be understood.It is often exudate as one would expect, but transudative  effusions also occur and would indicate more benign course.
  • The sterility of pericardial fluid has not been proven. Culture studies are rarely done from effusions associated with IE.
  • Pericardial effusions appear more often seen in IE of right heart valves. They turn out to be  IV drug abusers.
  • Contained rupture of an abscess needs to be differentiated from effusion

Can we give steroids for PE associated with IE?

Steroids can rapidly plug the inflammatory pores in the from the pericardial surface.It may also prevent future constriction. Currently, routine steroid therapy is not advised in infective pathology . If the infection is confirmed and is being taken care of by antimicrobial therapy there could be a role for steroids with user discretion.

Final message

During the echocardiographic evaluation of IE, the presence of pericardial effusion should be specifically looked for. These patients should be flagged and will require monitoring as the prognosis of PE complicating IE is a concern unless proved benign.

Reference

Two studies one from Spain and other from Egypt looked into this issue specifically.

 

Read Full Post »

 

 

Read Full Post »

Science is a journey in pursuit of truth. Hence, we search for it again and again.  (Thus, recurrent search becomes Re-Search)

As we try to progress in our knowledge towards absolute truth,  we need to admit our errors first. I think, one such error is blinking right in front of us in the vibrant corridors of coronary care and cath labs every day!  It is about the definition with which we deal the success of primary PCI. (A supposedly revolutionary acute coronary therapeutics  this century)

Waiting for the day . . . when all those fancy primary PCIs that leave the myocardium hurt (& retire ) with significant LV dysfunction to be reclassified as clear cases of primary PCI failures.

Read Full Post »

Severe aortic stenosis will cut off the systolic BP and hence classical pulsus parvus et tardus occurs. This is what , we have been taught all along.

How for it is true?  

One thing is clear from clinical observation. Systolic BP need not be low, often its normal even in severe Aortic stenosis. The issue becomes curious when  high BP is associated with severe Aortic stenosis. This can happen by a variety of mechanisms.(Aging/Loss of Aortic elasticity /Pressure recovery/Hypertension)  I think, there have been little correlative studies of pulsus parvus with central aortic pressure.

Can Aortic stenosis be a cause for systolic Hypertension?   (This academically murky question rose after I stumbled upon this paper )

This paper from the journal of Human Hypertension which was published many decades ago.It sincerely documented high BP in spite of severe AS . The most crucial aspect of this study , however, was the fact that hypertension was completely corrected after Aortic valve replacement. The authors attributed to this high systolic BP as the transmission of LV chamber pressure. This is a frontal attack on the traditional concept of pulsus parvus and systolic decapitation in LVOT obstruction.

I am not sure, whether knowledge always breeds knowledge. Medical science is equally affected by new-onset Ignorance or not recognizing past knowledge.( Like this paper of 1996.) I think this study is done with a good scientific basis and unable to find any serious flaws. Hats of to the authors. This could lead to a further breakthrough in our understanding of transvalvular gradients in Aortic stenosis and the poorly understood vascular- valvular Interactions. With, catheter-based TAVRs become so common, we can exactly measure the pressure dynamics in the Aortic root pre and post valve replacement. (* My take is , systolic BP in severe Aortic stenosis  is preserved until the onset of LV dysfunction)

Reference

Read Full Post »