Pneumologia

97

Original Papers • DOI: 10.2478/pneum-2020-0020 • 69 • 2020 • 97-102

Management of neoplastic pericarditis – overview of 156 patients

1Clinic of Thoracic Surgery, Institute of Oncology ‘Prof. Dr. Al. Trestioreanu’, Bucharest, Romania2University of Medicine and Pharmacy ‘Carol Davila’, Bucharest, Romania

Elena Jianu1, Natalia Motas1,2,*, Mihnea Davidescu1,2, Ovidiu Rus1, Corina Bluoss1, Veronica Manolache1, Madalina Iliescu1, Teodor Horvat1,2

Abstract

English:Introduction: Neoplastic pericarditis may develop in any type of cancer, but it is found more frequently in lung cancer, breast cancer and lymphoma.Methods: We studied 156 consecutive oncological patients presented with pericardial fluid between 2010 and 2015. Among them, 80 patients were stable, with no indication for pericardial drainage or biopsy, and 76 patients needed surgery to evacuate the pericardium and obtain biopsy.Results: Echocardiography and computed tomography were essential in evaluating the topography of the pericardial fluid and the haemodynamic effect, and these investigations helped us choose the appropriate surgical procedure. We performed pericardiocentesis, subxiphoid pericardial drainage, left paraxifoidian pericardial drainage, pericardio-pleural window through intercostal video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) or through classical thoracic surgery. Twenty-three patients (14.7%) were admitted and treated for cardiac tamponade. The rate of recurrence after pericardial drainage was 3.89%. The immediate survival at 48 h was 97.3%.Conclusion: Long-term survival in patients with malignancy and drained pericardial effusion is influenced mainly by the type of underlying malignant disease. We observed a better survival in patients without cardiac tamponade. Immediate survival depends on the pericardial shock complication – postoperative low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) or pericardial decompression syndrome (PDS). The indication for pericardial drainage depends on the quantity of pericardial fluid, presence of tamponade, associated pleural effusion and need for biopsy, offering the maximum possible benefit and safety for the patient.

Keywordsneoplastic pericardial effusion • cardiac tamponade • surgical pericardial drainage • video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) • pericardial fenestration • subxiphoidian pericardial drainage • paraxiphoidian pericardial drainage

*Corresponding author: Natalia Motas

E-mail: natalia.motas@gmail.com

Rezumat

Romanian:Introducere: Pericardita neoplazica poate apare in orice tip de cancer, insa este mai frecventa in cancerul pulmonar, neoplasmul mamar si limfoame.Material si metoda: Am studiat 156 de pacienti oncologici consecutivi care s-au prezentat cu pericardita in intervalul 2010 – 2015. Din acestia, 80 au fost stabili, fara indicatie de drenaj sau biopsie pericardica, iar 76 de pacienti au necesitat interventie chirurgicala pentru drenaj pericardic si biopsie.Rezultate: Ecografia cardiaca si tomografia computerizata au fost esentiale in aprecierea topografiei lichidului pericardic si a efectului hemodinamic, in plus au ajutat la alegerea caii de abord chirurgical. Procedeele chirurgicale de drenaj pericardic au fost: pericardiocenteza, drenajul pericardic subxifoidian, drenajul pericardic paraxifoidian, fenestrarea pericardo-pleurala prin chirurgie toracica video-asistata CTVA sau prin chirurgie toracica clasica. Douazeci si trei de pacienti (14.7%) s-au prezentat cu tamponada cardiaca. Rata de recurenta dupa drenajul pericardic a fost 3.89%. Supravietuirea imediata la 48h a fost de 97.3%.

Managementul pericarditelor neoplazice – evaluarea a 156 de pacienti

Rezumat

Open Access. © 2020 Jianu et al., published by Sciendo This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License.

98

Pneumologia

Concluzii: Supravietuirea pe termen lung la pacientii oncologici cu pericardita drenata este influentata majoritar de tipul neoplaziei subiacente. Am observat supravietuire mai buna la cei fara tamponada cardiaca. Supravietuirea imediata este influentata de aparitia socului pericardic, sau sindromul postoperator de debit cardiac scazut, sau sindromul de decompresie pericardica. Indicatia de drenaj pericardic depinde de cantitatea de lichid pericardic, de prezenta tamponadei, de asocierea pleureziei si de necesitatea obtinerii biopsiei, oferind astfel pacientilor maximul posibil de siguranta si beneficiu.

Cuvinte-cheiepericardita neoplazica • tamponada cardiaca • drenaj pericardic • fenestrare pericardica prin chirurgie toracica video-asistata CTVA • drenaj pericardic subxifoidian • drenaj pericardic paraxifoidian

Introduction

The pericardium is composed of a fibrous parietal membrane and a thin visceral membrane. The space between them usually contains <50 ml of plasma ultrafiltrate (1,2). The parietal pericardium is non-compliant – if the fluid accumulates rapidly, the pressure in the pericardial space increases, which can compromise the diastolic filling of the right heart and lead to tamponade (3). However, if the fluid accumulates slowly, the pericardium can enlarge and may accumulate >2,000 ml fluid.Patients with cancer usually accumulate pericardial fluid slowly (2). This may develop in any type of cancer, but this condition is found with increased frequency in lung cancer, followed by breast cancer and lymphoma (4,5). The incidence of increased pericardial fluid in patients with cancer has been proven in 15%–20% during autopsies (6,7).

Materials and methods

We studied 156 oncological patients consecutively presenting with pericardial fluid between 2010 and 2015. There were 74 women and 82 men. Patients ranged in age from 28 to 83 years, with a predilection in the sixth and seventh decades of life.The electrocardiogram (ECG) of patients with intrapericardial fluid was either normal or with low QRS voltage, ST/T-wave changes, as described in the literature (4,5). The chest X-ray showed enlarged cardiac silhouette when the quantity of the pericardial fluid was high (4,5,8).Echocardiography (Figure 1) is the most important method of evaluating the presence, location and haemodynamic effect of pericardial fluid on the right heart (2,4,9).Computed tomography (Figure 2) evaluates the presence, topography and thickness of the pericardial fluid. Especially in oncological patients, thoracic CT scan offers information about other modifications inside the thorax due to the underlying malignancy (tumours, pleurisy, and so on). The CT scan helps the surgeon to choose the appropriate surgical procedure (10,11).

Among all 156 patients with pericardial effusion, 80 were asymptomatic and clinically stable – cardiac follow-up was indicated (clinical symptoms, ECG and cardiac ultrasonography), and they received treatment for the underlying malignancy. Seventy-six patients were symptomatic and needed surgery to evacuate the pericardial fluid. Surgical interventions were performed based on the clinical, biological and oncological status of the patient.

Results

Pericardial effusion appeared most frequently in lung cancer (93 patients), followed by breast cancer (34 patients), lymphoma (eight patients) and other types of neoplasia (Figure 3): five cases of cervical cancer, two cases of melanoma and one each of the following types: renal, endometrial, vulvar, colonic, ovarian, gastric, prostatic, thymic and basal cell carcinomas, lip neoplasm, fibrosarcoma, teratoma and mesothelioma.More than half of our patients were smokers (88 patients, 56.4%) (Figure 4), probably because of the high number of lung neoplasia cases.Among the 156 patients, 23 were admitted with cardiac tamponade and managed in emergency.The surgical interventions for the 76 patients were chosen based on their clinical status, the presence of the tamponade and the possibility to receive general anaesthesia, the topography and quantity of pericardial fluid and the presence of pleural fluid. In addition, the need for pericardial biopsy (expressed by the clinical oncologist) played an important role in choosing the surgical procedure. The surgical procedures performed in our patients were pericardiocentesis (needle-based partial evacuation of the pericardial fluid), subxiphoid pericardial drainage, left paraxifoidian pericardial drainage, pericardio-pleural window through intercostal video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) or through classical thoracic surgery (12) (Figures 5 and 6).

99

Jianu et al.: Management of neoplastic pericarditis

The rate of recurrence after pericardial drainage was 3.89%. The immediate survival at 48 h was 97.3% (12).The 80 patients without indication for pericardial drainage were monitored; they received non-steroidal anti-inflammatory

drugs, according to cardiologist recommendation, and when indicated by the oncologist, the oncological treatment was continued.

Discussion

Pericardial effusion may appear in any type of cancer (13). Clinical manifestation may vary from asymptomatic to haemodynamic collapse secondary to cardiac tamponade (1,4,8). The most accurate prevalence data of pericardial

Figure 1. Echocardiography showing the presence of massive pericardial fluid. The thickness of pericardial fluid at the apex is 4.6 cm (upper left corner).

Figure 2. Computed tomography scan shows the circumferential pericardial fluid without pericardial adhesions, significant left pleurisy with lung collapse and medium right pleurisy.

Figure 3. Distribution of the 156 patients according to the primary neoplasia.

100

Pneumologia

effusion come from autopsies, with studies reporting prevalence up to 20% (4,7,12).The long-term survival of cancer patients with pericardial effusions is not influenced by age or sex and is not affected by the surgical technique used. The type of cancer carries the long-time prognosis in patients with neoplastic pericarditis (8,11). The worst survival rate is in lung cancer, and the best long-term survival is found in lymphomas and breast cancer, mainly because of their good response to chemotherapy (4,8).In our study, lung cancer was the most frequent type of neoplasia, i.e. 93 out of 156 cases, almost 60%. In fact, the 16 open (through thoracotomy) pericardial fenestrations were performed in patients who intraoperatively proved to have unresectable tumours associated with pericardial fluid – the pericardium was opened for drainage but mainly for intrapericardial assessment of resectability of the tumour. Most of the patients (13 out of 16) had lung cancer, this pathology being the vast majority of presentations in our clinic, as we presented elsewhere (14–18).The significance of the 48h survival period is that, following the pericardial drainage, the main specific complication is postoperative low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS), pericardial decompression syndrome (PDS) or pericardial shock, which remains the main cause of mortality and, therefore, influences the immediate survival (1,19). To reduce the risk of pericardial shock, we must evacuate the pericardium slowly, monitor the heart and use inotropic support (1,19).At 5 years after the last enrolled patient, we have 12 patients alive out of 156, i.e. 7.69%. Estimated survival at 5 years is presented in Figure 7, comparing two groups of patients: with or without pericardial drainage. The differences are not statistically significant (p = 0.07). Analysing the graphs, we

Figure 4. Distribution of patients with malignant pericardial effusion according to smoking status.

Figure 5. Types of surgical interventions performed in the 76 cases with indication for pericardial drainage. VATS = video-assisted thoracic surgery.

Figure 6. Pericardial fenestration by uniportal video-assisted thora-cic surgery: (1) tensioned pericardium is incised with thoracoscopic cautery and haemorrhagic pericardial fluid is evacuated slowly and (2) after evacuation, the pericardium (thicker than usual) is fenestra-ted, the heart is directly visible and the pericardial fragment is sent to pathology.

Figure 7. Kaplan–Meier survival curves for operated and conserva-tively treated patients. No statistically significant differences were observed between the survival rates of patients who underwent surgery and those treated conservatively (p = 0.07).

101

Jianu et al.: Management of neoplastic pericarditis

can observe a better survival for patients with pericardial drainage after 1 year.In addition, comparing the calculated survival rate of patients with or without tamponade (Figure 8), we observe the difference to be statistically non-significant, but from the graphs, the patients without tamponade present a better survival.These two findings support the idea that long-term survival is influenced mainly by the type of malignant disease, similar to the one presented earlier.Pericardiocentesis can be done rapidly, using only anatomic landmarks and/or echographic guidance, under local anaesthesia. However, it is associated with high rate of recurrence, up to 50%, and a significant mortality and cardiac complications, compared with any other pericardial approach (3,9). In addition, in patients with malignancy, it cannot provide pericardial biopsy when needed.The lowest rate of recurrence is found for the pericardio-pleural window done thoracoscopically or by VATS, followed by subxifoidian and left paraxifoidian drainages (6,11). The subxifoidian and left paraxifoidian approaches are, in fact, ways to evacuate the pericardium, drain it with a tube and obtain pericardial biopsy; after removal of the tube, the pericardium remains opened into the mediastinum – a pericardio-mediastinal fenestration. This is the reason why we perform the pericardial biopsy and fenestration as wide as we can. In our study, the rate of recurrence after pericardial drainage was 3.89%.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the overall prognosis of patients with malignant pericardial effusion remains poor, linked to their

underlying malignancy, mainly depending on the response of the malignancy to oncological treatment. The immediate prognosis depends on the pericardial shock complication, also known as postoperative LCOS (low cardiac output syndrome) or PDS (pericardial decompression syndrome). The procedure of surgical drainage of pericardial effusion in each oncological patient must be chosen depending on the presence of tamponade, the quantity of pericardial fluid, the associated pleural effusion and the need for biopsy, offering the maximum possible benefit and safety from the surgical procedure.

Ethical approval

Inform consent was obtained from the patients in order to participate to the study and write the article.

Conflicts of interests

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

1. Horvat T, Fudulu D. Fiziologia pericardului. In: Pericardul, Editu-ra Academiei Romane, (Bucureşti); 2015: 55-63.

2. Petrofsky M. Management of malignant pericardial effusion. Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology. 2014;5(4): 281–289.

3. Roberts JR, Kaiser LR. Pericardial procedures. In: Mastery of cardiothoracic surgery. 2nd ed., Kaiser LR, Kron IL, Spray TL (eds.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007. p.254–261.

4. Singh D, Katlic MR: Malignant pericardial effusions. In: General thoracic surgery. 7th ed. sub red. Shields TW. Philadelphia: Lip-pincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p.885–890.

5. Horvat T, Ciuche A. Pericarditele Maligne. In: Tratat de Chir-urgie sub red. Popescu I. volumul IV “Chirurgie Toracica” sub red.Horvat T., Editura Academiei Române, Bucureşti; 2008. p.347–357.

6. Motas C, Motas N, Rus O, Horvat T. Left paraxifoidian aproach for drainage of pericardial effusions. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2010;10(1): 4–6.

7. Cullinane CA, Paz IB, Smith D, Carter N, Grannis FW. Prog-nostic factors in the surgical management of pericardial effusion in the patient with concurrent malignancy. Chest. 2004;125(4): 1328–1334.

8. Jianu E, Motas N, Nicolae R, Dumitrascu O, Horvat T. The sur-gical management of pericardial effusions in cancer patients. Proceedings of the Romanian Academy, Series B, 2015;Supple-ment 1: 112–115.

Figure 8. Kaplan–Meier survival curves for patients with and without cardiac tamponade who received pericardial drainage.

102

Pneumologia

9. The Task Force on the Diagnosis and Management of Pericar-dial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology, European Heart Journal, Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Management of Pericardial Diseases, Executive Summary. 2004;25: 587–610.

10. Refaat MM, Katz WE. Neoplastic pericardial effusion. Clinical Cardiology. 2011;34(10): 593–598.

11. Ciuche A, Nistor C, Motas C, Horvat T. Chirurgia Miniinvazivă in Tratamentul Pleuro-Pericarditelor Maligne. Chirurgia (Buc), 2012;2: 206–212.

12. Jianu E, Motas N, Davidescu M, Rus O, Bluoss C, Alexe V, et al. Immediate postoperative results in the surgical treatment of neoplastic pericarditis – 76 consecutive cases. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2020;115(3): 341–347.

13. Laham RJ, Cohen DJ, Kuntz RE, Baim DS, Lorell BH, Simons M. Pericardial effusion in patients with cancer: outcome with con-temporary management strategies. Heart. 1996;75: 67–71.

14. Motas N, Motas C, Davidescu M, Bluoss C, Rus O, Bobocea A, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodule-150 resected cases. Chirurgia (Buc). 2010;105(2): 195–201.

15. Rus O, Motaş C, Motaş N, Achim D, Horvat T. Bronchoanasto-motic and bronchoplastic resections in pulmonary malignancy retrospective study 2000 – 2009. Chirurgia (Buc). 2014;109(4): 455–460.

16. Nistor C, Motas N, Motas C, Davidescu M, Tetu M, Vasilescu F, et al. Surgical procedures in broncho-pulmonary carcinoids – our experience of 92 consecutive cases. Acta Endocrinologica (Buc). 2009;5(3): 359–370.

17. Motas N, Davidescu M, Manolache V, Burlacu A, Horvat T. Null 30-days mortality after 72 consecutive left open pneumonecto-mies for lung cancer. Journal of Thoracic Oncology. 2017;12(11)S2: S2350–S2350.

18. Dediu M, Ion O, Ion R, Alexandru A, Median D, Gal C, et al. Impact of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IB non-small-cell lung cancer: an analysis of 112 consecutively treated patients. Journal of BUON. 2012;17(2): 317–322.

19. Sabzi F, Faraji R. Predictors of post pericardiotomy low cardiac output syndrome in patients with pericardial effusion. Journal of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Research. 2015;7(1): 18–23.