The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Corticosteroids for Recurrent Pericarditis: High Versus Low Doses: A Nonrandomized Observation
Open accessAbstract
Background— Corticosteroid use is widespread in recurrent pericarditis, even if rarely indicated, and high doses (eg, prednisone 1.0 to 1.5 mg · kg −1 · d −1 ) are generally recommended, although only weak evidence supports their use with possible severe side effects. The aim of this work was to compare side effects, recurrences and other complications, and hospitalizations of a low- versus high-dose regimen of prednisone for recurrent pericarditis. Methods and Results— A retrospective review of all cases of recurrent pericarditis treated with corticosteroids according to different regimens from January 1996 to June 2004 was performed in 2 Italian referral centers. One hundred patients with recurrent pericarditis (mean age, 50.1±15.8 years; 57 females) were included in the study; 49 patients (mean age, 47.5±16.0; 25 females) were treated with low doses of prednisone (0.2 to 0.5 mg · kg −1 · d −1 ), and 51 patients (mean age, 52.6±15.3; 32 females) were treated with prednisone 1.0 mg · kg −1 · d −1 . Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were well balanced across the groups. Each initial dose was maintained for 4 weeks and then slowly tapered. After adjustment for potential confounders (age, female gender, nonidiopathic origin), only high doses of prednisone were associated with severe side effects, recurrences, and hospitalizations (hazard ratio, 3.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.96 to 6.63; P <0.001). Conclusions— Use of higher doses of prednisone (1.0 mg · kg −1 · d −1 ) for recurrent pericarditis is associated with more side effects, recurrences, and hospitalizations. Lower doses of prednisone should be considered when corticosteroids are needed to treat pericarditis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A Randomized Trial of Colchicine for Acute Pericarditis
Imazio, M., Brucato, A., Cemin, R., Ferrua, S., Maggiolini, S., Beqaraj, F., Demarie, D., Forno, D., Ferro, S., Maestroni, S., et al. (2013) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1208536 · Cited by 611
Self-citationImazio, M., Belli, R., Brucato, A., Cemin, R., Ferrua, S., Beqaraj, F., Demarie, D., Ferro, S., Forno, D., Maestroni, S., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62709-9 · Cited by 406
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Imazio, M., Brucato, A., Cumetti, D., Brambilla, G., Demichelis, B., Ferro, S., Maestroni, S., Cecchi, E., Belli, R., Palmieri, G., & Trinchero, R.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 2008-08-05
- Volume
- 118
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 667-671
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2062428590
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Corticosteroids for Recurrent Pericarditis: High Versus Low Doses: A Nonrandomized Observation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.107.761064
- The paper
- Imazio, M., Brucato, A., Cumetti, D., Brambilla, G., Demichelis, B., Ferro, S., Maestroni, S., Cecchi, E., Belli, R., Palmieri, G., & Trinchero, R. (2008). Corticosteroids for Recurrent Pericarditis: High Versus Low Doses: A Nonrandomized Observation. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.107.761064
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.