P239 Are patients with acute pericardial syndromes adequately screened for connective tissue diseases? Results from a single-centre study and comparison to European Society of Cardiology Guidelines
Authors: Srikantharajah Denesh , Joseph Vikram , Kaul Arvind 
Published: April 2022

Background/Aims

Pericardial syndromes (PS) comprising pericarditis, pericardial effusions, cardiac tamponade, and constrictive pericarditis, can be presenting features of connective tissue disease (CTD) including lupus (SLE) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). PS comprise 0.1% of all hospital admissions and 5% of acute non-cardiac chest pain. PS occur as single episodes but recur in 30% of patients within 18 months after the first episode. The 2015 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) pericardial disease guidelines recommend assessment of NSAID response with follow-up and tests in those who are NSAID non-responders or who have recurrent PS. We audited the management of patients presenting with PS in a tertiary referral centre, using the 2015 ESC guideline standards to determine if investigations to uncover autoimmune diseases as a cause of PS were performed.

Methods

We obtained data on all patients coded with PS presenting to St George’s Hospital Emergency Department between Jan 1st, 2019, and October 31st, 2020. We also searched data including patients’ length of stay, test results including blood tests, imaging (X-ray, ultrasound, CT and MRI), initial management, outpatient follow-up, recurrence numbers and identifiable cause. Data were compared to the 2015 ESC guidelines.

Results

We identified 132 PS cases, of which 37 (28%) had recurrent pericardial disease. Of these, 15 (41%) were screened for connective tissue disease with antinuclear antibody (ANA) testing. Of those tested, nine (60%) had a positive ANA (titre 1/80 or greater), with three (33%) positive for extractable nuclear antigens (anti-Ro, anti-Sm and anti-RNP). Only 14 patients (38%) with recurrent disease had rheumatoid factor (RhF) tested, with four of these (29%) positive, while one of eight (12.5%) patients tested was anti-CCP antibody positive. Only 13 of 37 recurrent cases (35%) had both ANA and RhF tested. Furthermore, 37 of all PS cases (28%) were not followed up after initial presentation, while only five (14%) of recurrent cases received any follow up. By contrast, presumed infection tested serologically was found in only 7.8% of all cases tested, most commonly Mycoplasma or raised ASOT.

Conclusion

A high proportion of recurrent PS patients screened in our study had a positive ANA, ENA or RhF suggesting screening can identify new potential CTD, including SLE or RA. These patients require different treatment strategies to infectious PS. We demonstrated screening was inconsistent despite the absence of obvious infective causes in most cases and limited to 41% of patients with recurrent disease, which present the highest risk of association with CTD. ESC guidelines recommend all patients be followed up after 1 week, yet few high-risk patients received any outpatient review, from any speciality. There is a pressing need to ensure potential cases of CTD presenting as PS are not missed as doing so may prolong symptoms and worsen outcome.

Disclosure

D. Srikantharajah: None. V. Joseph: None. A. Kaul: None.