Pericardial Tamponade Vs Pericardial effusion ( What Is the difference ?? )

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Askar

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Pericardial Tamponade Vs Pericardial effusion ( What Is the difference ?? )

Thanks for all

note : i searched and founded this quastion but no one give a correct answer and very old post


thanks all and i wating you 😀

Members don't see this ad.
 
Pericardial Tamponade Vs Pericardial effusion ( What Is the difference ?? )

Thanks for all

note : i searched and founded this quastion but no one give a correct answer and very old post


thanks all and i wating you 😀

I read that "very old post" (7 years ago) in which time the definitions haven't changed. The original thread is right, impaired cardiac function distinguishes tamponade from effusion. Don't know why you thought it was incorrect.
 
Pericardial effusion is the precursor to tamponade. You can have minor accumulation of transudate/exudate which is an effusion. This does NOT mean you have tamponade. Pericardial effusion occurs from varying reasons - Tuberculosis/CHF/tumors/infections.

Tamponade is SEVER impairment from effusion/fluid accumulation which adversely affects cardiac function - hypotension, kusmalls sign/inspiration effect, JVD.

It's almost similar to compensated HF to decompensated HF.

Yeah, I looked into it - Tamponade is almost always from ACUTE issues/injury like trauma. The pericardium doesn't have time to expand and so the fluid compresses the heart. Effusion is chronic which always some compensation.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
effusion = fluid in the space
tamponade = fluid pushing on the heart, preventing it from diastolic filling.
 
Pericardial effusion is the precursor to tamponade. You can have minor accumulation of transudate/exudate which is an effusion. This does NOT mean you have tamponade. Pericardial effusion occurs from varying reasons - Tuberculosis/CHF/tumors/infections.

Tamponade is SEVER impairment from effusion/fluid accumulation which adversely affects cardiac function - hypotension, kusmalls sign/inspiration effect, JVD.

It's almost similar to compensated HF to decompensated HF.

Yeah, I looked into it - Tamponade is almost always from ACUTE issues/injury like trauma. The pericardium doesn't have time to expand and so the fluid compresses the heart. Effusion is chronic which always some compensation.

The chronic effusions w/o tamponade I have seen on US tended to be much bigger than the one tamponade I saw for the reason you mentioned (the pericardium had time to expand).
 
Pericardial effusion is the precursor to tamponade. You can have minor accumulation of transudate/exudate which is an effusion. This does NOT mean you have tamponade. Pericardial effusion occurs from varying reasons - Tuberculosis/CHF/tumors/infections.

Tamponade is SEVER impairment from effusion/fluid accumulation which adversely affects cardiac function - hypotension, kusmalls sign/inspiration effect, JVD.

It's almost similar to compensated HF to decompensated HF.

Yeah, I looked into it - Tamponade is almost always from ACUTE issues/injury like trauma. The pericardium doesn't have time to expand and so the fluid compresses the heart. Effusion is chronic which always some compensation.

excellent.
 
Pericardial effusion is the precursor to tamponade. You can have minor accumulation of transudate/exudate which is an effusion. This does NOT mean you have tamponade. Pericardial effusion occurs from varying reasons - Tuberculosis/CHF/tumors/infections.

Tamponade is SEVER impairment from effusion/fluid accumulation which adversely affects cardiac function - hypotension, kusmalls sign/inspiration effect, JVD.

It's almost similar to compensated HF to decompensated HF.

Yeah, I looked into it - Tamponade is almost always from ACUTE issues/injury like trauma. The pericardium doesn't have time to expand and so the fluid compresses the heart. Effusion is chronic which always some compensation.

Not to step on toes or call anyone out, but I've seen it posted a couple of times on SDN that cardiac tamponade is associated with Kussmaul sign. I wanted to provide some evidence to the contrary:

Sapira's Art & Science of Bedside Diagnosis said:
The Kussmaul sign is seen in constrictive pericarditis, some cases of endomyocardial restrictive disease (such as endocardial fibroelastosis), myocardial restrictive disease (such as amyloidosis), tricuspid stenosis, congestive failure (especially that called right sided), superior vena cava syndrome, and right ventricular infarction. But, contrary to what was formerly taught, it is never seen in uncomplicated pericardial tamponade. In fact, its apperance in the latter setting suggests the development of a constrictive or restrictive pericardial component and/or epimyocardial fibrosis. In pure tamponade, pericardial pressure and right atrial pressure are elevated but equal to each other. The inspiratory fall in intrathoracic pressure is transmitted to the pericardial space, and the normal inspriatory increase in systemic venous return is preserved so that Kussmaul sign does not occur. The pericardial space is obliterated in constrictive pericarditis so that during inspiration the decrease in intrathoracic pressure is not transmitted to the heart, venous return does not fall, and systemic venous return does not increase.

So, in essence, in terms of cardiac tamponade versus constrictive pericarditis, Kussmaul sign is only seen in (and for our purposes, is rather specific for) the latter.
 
Not to step on toes or call anyone out, but I've seen it posted a couple of times on SDN that cardiac tamponade is associated with Kussmaul sign. I wanted to provide some evidence to the contrary:



So, in essence, in terms of cardiac tamponade versus constrictive pericarditis, Kussmaul sign is only seen in (and for our purposes, is rather specific for) the latter.

Nice find.👍
 
The chronic effusions w/o tamponade I have seen on US tended to be much bigger than the one tamponade I saw for the reason you mentioned (the pericardium had time to expand).

You're misquoting/bolding me. My initial statement was to give you a broad idea of how to differentiate the two. Effusions tend to be chronic whereas tamponade are acute. Yes, you can have large fluid accumulations in effusions... I don't think I said they didn't.
Not to step on toes or call anyone out, but I've seen it posted a couple of times on SDN that cardiac tamponade is associated with Kussmaul sign. I wanted to provide some evidence to the contrary:

You'll have to blame my resources. Good find.
 
You're misquoting/bolding me. My initial statement was to give you a broad idea of how to differentiate the two. Effusions tend to be chronic whereas tamponade are acute. Yes, you can have large fluid accumulations in effusions... I don't think I said they didn't.


You'll have to blame my resources. Good find.

I read your post to say that pure effusions tend to 'minor accumulations' meaning tamponades would be generally be greater volumes. Which I am saying is not what I have seen in my limited exposure to them in lectures and in the ED.

The effusions without tamponade were major accumulations not minor (because they had weeks to accumulate before effects were noticed). And the effusions with tamponades were relatively minor accumulations comparatively.

If that is not what you where imply then I read your post wrong.


Edit: And I am sure you could have large tamponades too...but I was just implying it's more about rate of fluid accumulation than the actual size.
 
Last edited:
Edit: And I am sure you could have large tamponades too...but I was just implying it's more about rate of fluid accumulation than the actual size.

That's my point 😉

I agree - effusions aren't small volumes. It's just that tamponades are rapid/acute which is what differentiates it from effusions.
 
Pericardial effusion is the precursor to tamponade. You can have minor accumulation of transudate/exudate which is an effusion. This does NOT mean you have tamponade. Pericardial effusion occurs from varying reasons - Tuberculosis/CHF/tumors/infections.

Tamponade is SEVER impairment from effusion/fluid accumulation which adversely affects cardiac function - hypotension, kusmalls sign/inspiration effect, JVD.

It's almost similar to compensated HF to decompensated HF.

Yeah, I looked into it - Tamponade is almost always from ACUTE issues/injury like trauma. The pericardium doesn't have time to expand and so the fluid compresses the heart. Effusion is chronic which always some compensation.

Worth noting that kussmaul's sign is not the same as just JVD

Kussmaul's sign is specifically a rise in jvd during inspiration, and not a constant jvd. Tamponade = constant jvd. Constrictive pericarditis = kussmaul's sign

Tamponade (beck's triad) = distant heart sounds, hypotension, JVD. If you look @ the jugular venous pressure graphs for tamponade vs constrictive pericarditis, you'll see loss of x and y descent for tamponade, b/c the right ventricle is not filling when the tricuspid valve opens. W/ constrictive pericarditis, the y descent remains--the ventricle will still fill, and thus you get kussmaul's sign and not just constant JVD

Link2swim: I would say it's more about the *effect* than the amount of fluid or the rate (acute vs. chronic). Beck's triad is the sin qua non or however you say it.
 
itt: discussing trivialities to pass the time away
 
Tamponade (beck's triad) = distant heart sounds, hypotension, JVD. If you look @ the jugular venous pressure graphs for tamponade vs constrictive pericarditis, you'll see loss of x and y descent for tamponade, b/c the right ventricle is not filling when the tricuspid valve opens. W/ constrictive pericarditis, the y descent remains--the ventricle will still fill, and thus you get kussmaul's sign and not just constant JVD
.

Given the fact that in 'merica everyone is fat, everyone has distant heart sounds
 
I just wanted to add a bit to this conversation because I'm actually doing a research study this summer on the different methods used to drain effusions.

For me the best way to think about it is that tamponade is essentially a possible complication of an effusion (if you have tamponade you still have an effusion). Tamponade is worse, because as everyone was saying, the fluid is causing pressure on the heart and this therefore causes hemodynamic compromise.

From my research I've seen effusions of all sizes both with or without tamponade. You can see tamponade with small effusions or large effusions. It is all very variable and 1+1 =2does not always apply. Like CaptainSSO says its more about the effect the effusion is having on the heart that distinguishes tamponade or not. Tamponade also doesn't have to be acute/from injury, anything that cause pericardial effusions can eventually lead to tamponade if the effusion isnt managed. I've seen echo reports where the effusion slowly grows and tamponade evidence grows along with it. When tamponade is present a trip to the OR to get a pericardial window is pretty much guaranteed but with effusions and no tamponade it depends on the specific patients and their medical problems.

Just wanted to throw in what I have learned in the clinical setting because I have been extensively looking through a lot of pericardial effusion patient charts lately 🙂


Worth noting that kussmaul's sign is not the same as just JVD

Kussmaul's sign is specifically a rise in jvd during inspiration, and not a constant jvd. Tamponade = constant jvd. Constrictive pericarditis = kussmaul's sign

Tamponade (beck's triad) = distant heart sounds, hypotension, JVD. If you look @ the jugular venous pressure graphs for tamponade vs constrictive pericarditis, you'll see loss of x and y descent for tamponade, b/c the right ventricle is not filling when the tricuspid valve opens. W/ constrictive pericarditis, the y descent remains--the ventricle will still fill, and thus you get kussmaul's sign and not just constant JVD

Link2swim: I would say it's more about the *effect* than the amount of fluid or the rate (acute vs. chronic). Beck's triad is the sin qua non or however you say it.
 
Given the fact that in 'merica everyone is fat, everyone has distant heart sounds

this is so true
one time i was auscultating an obese woman's chest and couldn't hear a thing
was like hmm i'm not exactly sure as to how you're still alive since you don't seem to have a heartbeat
 
this is so true
one time i was auscultating an obese woman's chest and couldn't hear a thing
was like hmm i'm not exactly sure as to how you're still alive since you don't seem to have a heartbeat

lol.

this thread has been both funny and hugely informative.
 
this is so true
one time i was auscultating an obese woman's chest and couldn't hear a thing
was like hmm i'm not exactly sure as to how you're still alive since you don't seem to have a heartbeat

"Waiter, more fried mayonnaise balls! I feel my blood movin'!"
 
Top