Knowledge of respiratory variation of the amplitude of the pulse in pericardial disease dates back a long way. Some early observers of this phenomenon had remarkably “modern” ideas concerning the underlying mechanisms. In 1619, when describing the case of a young woman with constrictive pericarditis, Lower (See Chapter 6) stated, “. . .the pulse was weak and intermittent ” and that “. . .the pericardium had become thick, opaque and almost callous.” He concluded that the movement of the diaphragm during breathing was the reason why the pulse disappeared during inspiration. This conclusion brought him close to the mechanism of pulsus paradoxus proposed by Auenbrugger (1958) Dock (1961) andWood 1961) but subsequently disproved (Shabetai Fowler Fenton 1965).
KeywordsCatheter Polyethylene Rubber Respiration Radionuclide
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Auenbrugger L. Novum Inventum Ex Percussione. Vienna, 1761. Quoted by East T. The Story of Heart Disease. Wm Dawson & Sons, Ltd, 1958. p 28.Google Scholar
- Dock W. Inspiratory traction on the pericardium.Arch Intern Med1961; 108:837–840. Dornhorst AC, Howard P, Leathart GI. Pulsus paradoxus.Lancet1952; 1:746–748.Google Scholar
- Fowler NO. Cardiac Diagnosis and Treatment (ed 2). New York, Harper & Row, 1976. pp 865–866.Google Scholar
- Kussmaul A. Mediastino-pericarditis and den paradoxen.Klinische Wochenschrift1873; 10:433–464.Google Scholar
- Wenckebach KF. Beobachtungen bei exsudativer and adhasiver Perikarditis. Zeitschrift Klin Med 1910; 71:402–420.Google Scholar