Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of empirical anti-tuberculous therapy (ATT) in patients with massive pericardial effusion (MPE) of unknown etiology in China.
Methods: In-hospital patients with MPE were assessed retrospectively. Based on thorough examination excluding neoplastic, autoimmune, and non-tuberculous infectious diseases, patients who had no evidence of tuberculosis (TB) were treated with empirical ATT (Group A) or not treated with empirical ATT (Group C), whereas those who had evidence of TB were treated with standard ATT (Group B). Clinical outcomes and mitigation of MPE were compared among the three groups to identify the effectiveness of ATT. The survival free of composite endpoint was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
Results: A total of 185 eligible patients were recruited: 77 in Group A, 80 in Group B, and 28 in Group C. The average follow-up was 52.9 ± 30.7, 49.4 ± 29.7, and 51.8 ± 30.2 months for Groups A, B, and C, respectively. The incidence of composite endpoint was 23.3, 24.4, and 85.7% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively (p < .0001). However, the clinical recovery rate was greater in Group B compared with Group A (p = .027). No significant difference in the safety profile of ATT was noted between Groups A and B. MPE did not spontaneously decrease in 85.7% of patients in Group C.
Conclusions: Empirical ATT should be considered in MPE of unknown etiology in countries with a high burden of TB.
Keywords: Tuberculosis; empirical anti-tuberculous therapy; pericardial effusion; pericarditis; retrospective study.