[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 1992

Pericardial Drainage vs Pericardial `Window'

Author Affiliations

Worcester, Mass

Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(7):1532. doi:10.1001/archinte.1992.00400190148034

To the Editor. —  The article on nonspecificity of antinuclear antibody (ANA) in pericardial fluid by Leventhal et al1 was very helpful for those of us who sometimes puzzle over this test. Although the authors make their main point quite nicely, their case was even more informative than they may have realized. Among many interesting aspects was the conversion in a very short time from a tamponading pericardial effusion to "dry" constrictive pericarditis, not discussed by the authors. I have seen the same phenomenon in malignant pericardial disease within approximately the same period, ie, 4 weeks. Their patient's S3 gallop was typical for constriction, and the pathologic specimen leaves little doubt. Although jugular venous distention was noted, no mention was made of Kussmaul's sign that might well have been present (although necessarily absent in the preceding tamponade). The "pulsus paradoxus" of 8 mm Hg is not really within