Evidence Hub

Updates on the Global Prevalence and Etiology of Constrictive Pericarditis: A Systematic Review

Kosmopoulos M, Liatsou Ε, Theochari C, Stavropoulos A, Chatzopoulou D, Mylonas KS, Georgiopoulos G, Schizas D

Cardiology in review, 2023

11,325 participants

Abstract

Constrictive pericarditis is a rare disease with poorly understood epidemiology. A systematic literature search was adopted to assess the region- and period-specific traits of constrictive pericarditis through Pubmed, EMBASE, and Scopus. Case reports and studies including less than 20 patients were excluded. The risk of bias was assessed through the Study Quality Assessment Tools developed by the National Heart Lung Blood Institute by 4 reviewers. Patient demographics, disease etiology, and mortality were the primary assessed outcomes. One hundred thirty studies with 11,325 patients have been included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The age at diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis has markedly increased after 1990. Patients from Africa and Asia are considerably younger compared with those from Europe and North America. Moreover, there are differences in etiology, as tuberculosis remains the dominant cause of constrictive pericarditis in Africa and Asia but has been surpassed by history of previous chest surgery in North America and Europe. The human immunodeficiency virus affects 29.1% of patients from Africa diagnosed with constrictive pericarditis, a feature that is not observed on any other continent. The early mortality rate after hospitalization has improved. The variances of age at diagnosis and etiology of constrictive pericarditis should be considered by the clinician during the work-up of cardiac and pericardial diseases. An underlying human…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 11,325 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free