LAUSR

OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to describe practice patterns of anesthetic management during pericardial window creation. DESIGN Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING Single tertiary cancer center. PARTICIPANTS A total of 150 patients treated for cancer between 2011 and 2015 were included in the study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS The primary objective was to evaluate anesthetic management in pericardial window creation. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and overall survival after pericardial window creation. Thirty-day mortality was 19.3%, and median survival was 5.84 months. Higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status of patients was associated with preinduction arterial line placement (51% ASA 3 v 79% ASA 4; p = 0.002) and use of etomidate for anesthetic induction (34% ASA 3 v 60% ASA 4; p = 0.003). However, there was no association between anesthetic management and presence of tamponade in these patients. Cardiac aspirate volume (per 10 mL: odds ratio [OR], 1.02 [95% CI, 1.0-1.04]; p = 0.026) and intraoperative arrhythmia (atrial fibrillation: OR, 6.76 [95% CI, 1.2-37.49]; p = 0.029; sinus tachycardia: OR, 4.59 [95% CI, 1.25-16.90]; p = 0.022) were associated independently with increased 30-day mortality. High initial heart rate (per 10 beats per minute: hazard ratio [HR], 1.18 [95% CI, 1.05-1.33]; p = 0.005) in the operating room and intraoperative sinus tachycardia (HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.15-3.03]; p = 0.012) were associated independently with worse overall survival. CONCLUSION Risk of death after pericardial window creation remains high in patients with cancer. Variations in anesthetic management did not affect survival in oncologic patients with pericardial effusions.