Echocardiography is a well-accepted tool for the diagnosis and quantification of pericardial effusion (PEff). Given the increasing use of computed tomographic (CT) scanning, more PEffs are being initially diagnosed by computed tomography. No study has compared quantification of PEff by computed tomography and echocardiography. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of quantification of PEff by 2-dimensional echocardiography and computed tomography compared to the amount of pericardial fluid drained at pericardiocentesis. We retrospectively reviewed an institutional database to identify patients who underwent chest computed tomography and echocardiography before percutaneous pericardiocentesis with documentation of the amount of fluid withdrawn. Digital 2-dimensional echocardiographic and CT images were retrieved and quantification of PEff volume was performed by applying the formula for the volume of a prolate ellipse, π × 4/3 × maximal long-axis dimension/2 × maximal transverse dimension/2 × maximal anteroposterior dimension/2, to the pericardial sac and to the heart. Nineteen patients meeting study qualifications were entered into the study. The amount of PEff drained was 200 to 1,700 ml (mean 674 ± 340). Echocardiographically calculated pericardial effusion volume correlated relatively well with PEff volume (r = 0.73, p <0.001, mean difference -41 ± 225 ml). There was only moderate correlation between CT volume quantification and actual volume drained (r = 0.4, p = 0.004, mean difference 158 ± 379 ml). In conclusion, echocardiography appears a more accurate imaging technique than computed tomography in quantitative assessment of nonloculated PEffs and should continue to be the primary imaging in these patients.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.