ライフサイエンスコーパス: pericardiocentesis

1 ing emergent reversal of anticoagulation and pericardiocentesis.

2 perforation occurred, requiring an emergent pericardiocentesis.

3 oximately 4.5 L of blood was removed via the pericardiocentesis.

4 on of malignancy with adverse outcomes after pericardiocentesis.

5 pisode of cardiac tamponade (0.9%) requiring pericardiocentesis.

6 eferably resolved by echocardiography-guided pericardiocentesis.

7 red for PE, 212 (13%) underwent percutaneous pericardiocentesis.

8 al tamponade (0.1% versus 1.0%; P=0.002) and pericardiocentesis (0% versus 1.3%; P<0.001).

9 mptomatic pericardial effusion with need for pericardiocentesis 1 week after discharge.

10 versus 1.6+/-1.1; P<0.001), and PROGRESS-CTO pericardiocentesis (2.9+/-1.1 versus 1.9+/-1.3; P<0.001)

11 ts with rupture/tamponade had surgery and/or pericardiocentesis (27/28); their in-hospital survival r

12 mmediate intervention; two patients required pericardiocentesis alone, and six underwent pericardioce

13 the success and complication rates of rescue pericardiocentesis and patient outcomes, including the n

14 pericardiocentesis alone, and six underwent pericardiocentesis and surgical intervention.

15 The tamponade resolved after pericardiocentesis and was managed by drainage through t

16 cy operations, 1 patient with postprocedural pericardiocentesis, and 1 patient with minor embolic str

17 icacy of rescue echocardiographically guided pericardiocentesis as a primary strategy for the managem

18 Consecutive patients undergoing pericardiocentesis at a single institution between Janua

19 Either a 9-Fr or 11-Fr pericardiocentesis catheter was inserted over a wire and

20 .6% to 0.4% (p = 0.027), and those requiring pericardiocentesis decreased from 2.9% to 1.5% (p = 0.36

21 Two hundred nineteen patients underwent pericardiocentesis during the study period.

22 s of cancer patients undergoing percutaneous pericardiocentesis for PE and assess the procedure's saf

23 Cancer patients who underwent percutaneous pericardiocentesis for PE between November 2009 and Octo

24 t pericardial effusion may require emergency pericardiocentesis if cardiac tamponade develops.

25 nation may assist in the decision to perform pericardiocentesis in patients with cardiac tamponade di

26 and efficacy of echocardiographically guided pericardiocentesis in this life-threatening situation an

27 perforation of the coronary sinus requiring pericardiocentesis in two others.

28 Percutaneous pericardiocentesis is less invasive than surgery, but it

29 kes, and a pericardial effusion treated with pericardiocentesis (n=1).

30 al diagnosis in some patients with difficult pericardiocentesis or pericardial biopsy in a noninvasiv

31 After pericardiocentesis or pericardiotomy, NSAIDs and colchic

32 omplicated PPS plus hospital readmission +/- pericardiocentesis or thoracentesis.

33 effusion were more likely to require repeat pericardiocentesis (OR = 6.0; P = .001) and pericardial

34 posite of death, cardiac tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis, or constrictive pericarditis.

35 posite of death, cardiac tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis, or constrictive pericarditis.

36 ions (hemopericardium, cardiac tamponade, or pericardiocentesis), pneumothorax, stroke, vascular comp

37 No deaths resulted from the rescue pericardiocentesis procedure itself.

38 pericardial effusion occurred in 1 patient: pericardiocentesis was performed, and the device was not

39 irmation of these radiographic findings, and pericardiocentesis was performed.

40 Echocardiographically guided pericardiocentesis was safe and effective for rescuing p

41 Rescue pericardiocentesis was successful in relieving tamponade

42 xudative PE who underwent thoracocentesis or pericardiocentesis were randomly enrolled.

43 Percutaneous pericardiocentesis with extended catheter drainage was s

44 s with known tamponade or those referred for pericardiocentesis with known effusion.

45 were hemodynamically unstable at the time of pericardiocentesis, with clinically overt tamponade in 4