Constrictive Pericarditis Diagnosis: A Comprehensive Guide

Constrictive pericarditis (CP) represents a less common manifestation of clinical heart failure, yet its accurate diagnosis is paramount due to its potentially reversible nature. While its precise prevalence remains undetermined, it’s estimated to occur in fewer than 0.5% of viral pericarditis cases. The significance lies in the availability of a definitive treatment: surgical pericardiectomy, which can effectively “cure” CP and substantially improve patient symptoms and overall quality of life. The causes of CP are diverse, encompassing idiopathic origins, post-viral complications, tuberculosis, post-surgical scenarios, and radiation-induced factors. Regardless of the initial cause, the condition culminates in the fibrous thickening or calcification of the pericardium, leading to a loss of pericardial compliance.

Understanding Pericardial Physiology and Pathophysiology in Constriction

Under normal physiological conditions, the pericardium exerts minimal influence on ventricular distensibility at typical cardiac operating volumes. However, in CP, the non-compliant pericardium creates a rigid ventricular-pericardial unit. This stiffness results in elevated diastolic pressures and a rapid increase in ventricular pressure in response to venous return. The noncompliant pericardium restricts ventricular relaxation and becomes the primary determinant of ventricular diastolic pressure, leading to elevated and equalized diastolic pressures across all heart chambers. Clinically, this condition predominantly manifests as right-sided congestion, characterized by symptoms such as jugular venous distention, edema, and ascites. Patients often experience dyspnea and exercise intolerance due to elevated pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and a diminished cardiac output response to physical exertion, resulting from inadequate ventricular filling. It’s important to note that frank pulmonary edema is less frequently observed compared to typical systolic heart failure.

The normal pericardium plays a crucial role in regulating the coupling of left and right ventricular stroke volumes during acute preload changes. For instance, a sudden increase in right-sided venous return during inspiration normally leads to leftward septal bowing and a reduction in left ventricular (LV) transmural filling pressure (LV diastolic pressure minus pericardial pressure). This, in turn, reduces LV end-diastolic volume (LV preload) and subsequently, left-sided stroke volume. In a healthy heart, these respiratory variations in stroke volume are minimal. However, in CP, the fixed pericardial volume exaggerates pericardial coupling, resulting in significant ventricular interdependence. This heightened interdependence leads to abnormal ventricular septal motion, driven by amplified respiratory alterations in left and right ventricular stroke volumes.

In CP, the rigid pericardium encasing the heart prevents the normal inspiratory decrease in intrathoracic pressure from being transmitted to intracardiac pressures. This dissociation amplifies inspiratory reductions in pulmonary venous pressure (as pulmonary veins are primarily extrapericardial), leading to a decreased left-sided inspiratory preload and further reducing left-sided inspiratory stroke volume. Multimodality diagnostic evaluation plays a crucial role in highlighting these physiological derangements, thereby facilitating accurate Constrictive Pericarditis Diagnosis.

Initial Clinical Assessment for Constrictive Pericarditis Diagnosis

Given the relatively low occurrence of CP, identifying key clinical features from patient history and physical examination is a critical initial step in the diagnostic process. A medical history including cardiac surgery, radiation therapy to the chest, or tuberculosis should raise clinical suspicion for CP, especially in patients presenting with edema, abdominal distention, and exertional dyspnea. Elevated jugular venous pressure (JVP) is a near-universal finding in CP patients who are not hypovolemic. The pericardial constraint in CP impairs the right heart’s ability to accommodate inspiratory abdominal venous return, resulting in an inspiratory increase in JVP, known as Kussmaul’s sign. The jugular venous waveform in CP typically exhibits prominent x and y descents, reflecting exaggerated longitudinal annular motion and rapid early ventricular filling, respectively. This contrasts with restrictive cardiomyopathy, where the x descent is often blunted due to impaired atrial relaxation and atrial myopathy. Auscultation may reveal a high-pitched pericardial knock along the left sternal border. Ascites and significant lower extremity edema are common findings, frequently leading to misdiagnosis of liver disease if JVP elevation is overlooked.

Laboratory tests are generally non-specific in CP. While an elevated B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level might suggest restrictive cardiomyopathy, studies have shown considerable overlap in BNP values between CP and restrictive cardiomyopathy, limiting its clinical utility in differentiating these conditions.

Echocardiography in Constrictive Pericarditis Diagnosis

Echocardiography serves as a valuable initial diagnostic tool and can confirm the diagnosis of CP in most cases when clinical suspicion is sufficiently high. Echocardiographic findings in CP demonstrate features of both exaggerated ventricular interdependence and intrathoracic-intracardiac dissociation. A pathognomonic echocardiographic finding is respirophasic septal shifting, detectable using M-mode or 2D imaging. In addition to exaggerated respiratory septal motion, an abnormal beat-to-beat septal motion, or “shudder,” may be observed, resulting from differential rapid early diastolic filling of the right and then left ventricles. The inferior vena cava is typically plethoric in CP patients without hypovolemia, a sensitive but not specific finding. Expiratory hepatic vein reversals and reduced diastolic forward flow can occur due to rightward ventricular septal motion from an expiratory increase in LV preload, which decreases effective right ventricular compliance.

Exaggerated respiratory preload changes are also reflected in Doppler echocardiography, with an inspiratory decrease in mitral valve inflow Doppler velocity and an increase in tricuspid valve inflow Doppler velocity. However, these findings can be insensitive, particularly in the presence of significantly elevated left atrial and pulmonary capillary wedge pressures, where the inspiratory decrease in wedge pressure-LV gradient may be insufficient to alter LV preload enough to significantly change mitral inflow Doppler magnitude. Tissue Doppler imaging is also informative in CP diagnosis. Due to lateral wall tethering, the lateral mitral annulus early diastolic tissue Doppler velocity (e’) is often reduced and abnormally lower than the medial e’ velocity, a phenomenon termed “annulus reversus.” In contrast to cardiomyopathic causes of heart failure, the medial e’ velocity is relatively normal or even increased (“annulus paradoxus”) in CP, reflecting preserved myocardial relaxation and compensatory medial annular longitudinal motion in the context of lateral wall tethering.

Cardiac Radiology in Constrictive Pericarditis Diagnosis

Chest X-rays in CP may reveal pericardial calcification, a pathognomonic finding when present in conjunction with clinical heart failure and elevated JVP. Chest computed tomography (CT) is more sensitive than chest X-ray for detecting pericardial calcification. Both chest CT and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) enable precise measurement of pericardial thickness. Cardiac MRI, in particular, demonstrates high accuracy (93%) in detecting pericardial thickening greater than 4 mm. However, it is important to note that a significant proportion (up to 18%) of surgically confirmed CP cases may exhibit normal pericardial thickness despite pathological non-compliance. Pericardial tethering, which can be visualized through echocardiography, CT, or MRI, can also provide valuable diagnostic information. Cardiac MRI offers the additional advantage of assessing for active pericardial inflammation, which can guide therapeutic decisions. Furthermore, cardiac MRI provides unique myocardial tissue characterization, which can help identify underlying cardiomyopathic processes when the diagnosis remains uncertain. Myocardial delayed enhancement is typically absent in isolated CP but may be present in up to one-third of patients with restrictive cardiomyopathy.

Cardiac CT and MRI offer advantages over echocardiography, as they are less dependent on patient body habitus and can provide superior cardiac visualization when echocardiographic imaging is suboptimal. Respirophasic shifts in septal motion are well visualized on both CT and MRI. Additionally, CT and MRI may help identify alternative causes of dyspnea, such as lung disease or diaphragmatic paralysis.

Diagnosis Beyond Cardiac Imaging: Cardiac Catheterization

Cardiac catheterization remains the gold standard diagnostic test for CP when non-invasive testing is inconclusive, providing direct assessment of constriction and its hemodynamic significance. While most CP patients do not require hemodynamic catheterization for diagnosis, it is particularly valuable in certain subgroups, such as patients with radiation heart disease. In these patients, differentiating the degree of underlying restrictive cardiomyopathy from constrictive physiology can be challenging, even with high-quality echocardiography and cardiac radiology. Invasive hemodynamic catheterization in CP can demonstrate characteristic findings, including elevated filling pressures with diastolic equalization, ventricular interdependence, and intrathoracic-intracardiac dissociation.

Treatment of Constrictive Pericarditis

Once CP is diagnosed, medical management with diuretics is often only partially effective in alleviating symptoms. In cases with evidence of active pericardial inflammation, a trial of anti-inflammatory therapy may be warranted to assess for potential reversibility before proceeding with pericardiectomy. Some patients with transient constriction due to inflammation may experience improvement in pericardial compliance with anti-inflammatory treatment. Surgical complete pericardiectomy is the definitive treatment for symptomatic CP. Utilizing a multimodality diagnostic approach, as illustrated in Figure 1, it is now uncommon for patients to undergo surgery solely for diagnostic confirmation of CP. Given the potentially transformative impact of pericardiectomy on patients’ quality of life, clinicians must maintain a high index of suspicion for this rare yet treatable form of heart failure, ensuring timely and accurate constrictive pericarditis diagnosis.

References

1. Imazio M, Brucato A, Maestroni S, et al. Risk of constrictive pericarditis after acute pericarditis. Circulation 2011;124:1270-5.
2. Geske JB, Anavekar NS, Nishimura RA, Oh JK, Gersh BJ. Differentiation of constriction and restriction: complex cardiovascular hemodynamics. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;68:2329-47.
3. Ling LH, Oh JK, Schaff HV, et al. Constrictive pericarditis in the modern era: evolving clinical spectrum and impact on outcome after pericardiectomy. Circulation 1999;100:1380-6.
4. Kroeker CA, Shrive NG, Belenkie I, Tyberg JV. Pericardium modulates left and right ventricular stroke volumes to compensate for sudden changes in atrial volume. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2003;284:H2247-54.
5. Talreja DR, Nishimura RA, Oh JK, Holmes DR. Constrictive pericarditis in the modern era: novel criteria for diagnosis in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;51:315-9.
6. Sengupta PP, Krishnamoorthy VK, Abhayaratna WP, et al. Comparison of usefulness of tissue Doppler imaging versus brain natriuretic peptide for differentiation of constrictive pericardial disease from restrictive cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 2008;102:357-62.
7. Leya FS, Arab D, Joyal D, et al. The efficacy of brain natriuretic peptide levels in differentiating constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:1900-2.
8. Babuin L, Alegria JR, Oh JK, Nishimura RA, Jaffe AS. Brain natriuretic peptide levels in constrictive pericarditis and restrictive cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1489-91.
9. Reddy PR, Dieter RS, Das P, Steen LH, Lewis BE, Leya FS. Utility of BNP in differentiating constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy in patients with renal insufficiency. J Card Fail 2007;13:668-71.
10. Welch TD, Ling LH, Espinosa RE, et al. Echocardiographic diagnosis of constrictive pericarditis: Mayo Clinic criteria. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2014;7:526-34.
11. Coylewright M, Welch TD, Nishimura RA. Mechanism of septal bounce in constrictive pericarditis: a simultaneous cardiac catheterisation and echocardiographic study. Heart 2013;99:1376.
12. Oh JK, Tajik AJ, Appleton CP, Hatle LK, Nishimura RA, Seward JB. Preload reduction to unmask the characteristic Doppler features of constrictive pericarditis: a new observation. Circulation 1997;95:796-9.
13. Reuss CS, Wilansky SM, Lester SJ, et al. Using mitral ‘annulus reversus’ to diagnose constrictive pericarditis. Eur J Echocardiogr 2009;10:372-5.
14. Ha JW, Oh JK, Ling LH, Nishimura RA, Seward JB, Tajik AJ. Annulus paradoxus: transmitral flow velocity to mitral annular velocity ratio is inversely proportional to pulmonary capillary wedge pressure in patients with constrictive pericarditis. Circulation 2001;104:976-8.
15. Ha JW, Ommen SR, Tajik AJ, et al. Differentiation of constrictive pericarditis from restrictive cardiomyopathy using mitral annular velocity by tissue Doppler echocardiography. Am J Cardiol 2004;94:316-9.
16. Ling LH, Oh JK, Breen JF, et al. Calcific constrictive pericarditis: is it still with us? Ann Intern Med 2000;132:444-50.
17. Masui T, Finck S, Higgins CB. Constrictive pericarditis and restrictive cardiomyopathy: evaluation with MR imaging. Radiology 1992;182:369-73.
18. Talreja DR, Edwards WD, Danielson GK, et al. Constrictive pericarditis in 26 patients with histologically normal pericardial thickness. Circulation 2003;108:1852-7.
19. Muehlberg F, Toepper A, Fritschi S, Prothmann M, Schulz-Menger J. Magnetic resonance imaging applications on infiltrative cardiomyopathies. J Thorac Imaging 2016;31:336-47.
20. Haley JH, Tajik AJ, Danielson GK, Schaff HV, Mulvagh SL, Oh JK. Transient constrictive pericarditis: causes and natural history. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:271-5.