Incidence and Predictors of Pericardial Effusion After Permanent Heart Rhythm Device Implantation

Abstract

Background: Pericardial effusion (PE) may complicate permanent heart rhythm device (HRD: pacemaker, implant- able cardioverter-defibrillator, and cardiac resynchronization therapy) placement. Incidence of and risk factors for this complication have never been prospectively evaluated. Methods and Results: The subjects of this prospective observational study were 968 consecutive patients under- going HRD implantation or upgrade, and underwent echocardiographic evaluation before and 24 h after the opera- tion. PE was documented in 98 patients (10%), 14 (1.5%) of whom progressed to cardiac tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis (n=12; 86%) or surgical treatment (n=2; 14%). In 70% (10/14) of those patients a bloody effusion suggested cardiac perforation of an implanted lead; acute pericarditis was observed in the remaining 30% (4/14). At multivariate analysis, female gender (hazard ratio [HR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4–3.5, P=0.01) was predictive in the case of any post-procedural PE, whereas intake of antiplatelet medication (HR, 3.1; 95% CI: 2.1–3.8, P=0.01) was predictive for cardiac tamponade. Previous cardiac surgery (HR, 0.70; 95% CI: 0.50–0.92, P=0.02) was a protective factor in any PE and cardiac tamponade. None of the 84 patients with small or moderate PE required pericardial drainage. After 3.1±0.5 months, a PE was no longer observed at echocardiography in 71% of those pa- tients. Conclusions: PE is frequently seen after HRD implantation, but rarely requires any therapy. Female gender and antiplatelet therapy are risk factors, whereas previous cardiac surgery was a protective factor. (Circ J 2013; 77: 975 – 981) Key