Safety and Efficacy of Echo- vs. Fluoroscopy-Guided Pericardiocentesis in Cardiac Tamponade.

Background and

Objectives

Cardiac tamponade is managed through echo- or fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous pericardiocentesis. The European Society of Cardiology's Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases proposed a triage strategy for these patients. This study evaluated the triage score and compared the safety and efficacy of fluoroscopy- versus echo-guided procedures without additional visualization control. Materials and

Methods

This prospective observational study included 71 patients with cardiac tamponade from February 2021 to June 2022. Pericardiocentesis was performed using fluoroscopy or echo guidance based on clinical assessment and catheterization laboratory availability, without the additional control of needle/guidewire position or ECG monitoring. Patients were followed for three months.

Results

The study included 71 patients (52.1% female, mean age 59.7 ± 15.7 years). Malignancy was the most common comorbidity (59.2%). Echo criteria led to urgent procedures in 47.9%, with subcostal access used most often (60.6%), particularly in fluoroscopy-guided procedures (93.8%, p = 0.003). The success rate was 97.1%, with minor complications in 14% of patients. Diabetes and malignancy predicted complications regardless of access site or guiding method. The triage score did not affect complication rates or short-term mortality.

Conclusions

Fluoroscopy- and echo-guided pericardiocentesis without additional visualization control showed no difference in safety or efficacy. Delaying the procedure for patients with a triage score ≥6, or performing it early for those with a low score, did not impact complication rates or mortality, which were more influenced by the progression of the underlying disease.