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
Spodick DH. Pericardial Drainage vs Pericardial `Window'. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(7):1532. doi:10.1001/archinte.1992.00400190148034
Browse and subscribe to JAMA Network podcasts!
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: