• Online Features  This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (14)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David J. Leehey, MD; John T. Daugirdas, MD; Todd S. Ing, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1983;143(9):1673-1675.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Pericarditis in patients with renal failure remains a serious problem, with mortality as high as 20%.¹ The etiology is unknown and may be multifactorial. The conventional approach to treatment has been intensive (daily) dialysis, using minimal or regional heparinization for 10 to 14 days.^2,3 Steroids given for systemic effect and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents have also been used, but controlled studies attesting to their benefit are lacking. With the advent of maintenance dialysis, two distinct forms of this disease have emerged. In patients with pericarditis who never received dialysis (uremic pericarditis), the response rate to intensive hemodialysis is almost 90%,² suggesting that uremia is a major causative factor. However, patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who have pericarditis (dialysis pericarditis) have only a 10% to 40% response rate to intensified hemodialysis,^1,2,4 suggesting that accumulation of dialyzable uremic toxins may not be the sole cause of the pericarditis. In fact, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations

CiteULike    Connotea    Delicious    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?