Autoinflammatory pericarditis

Article written and reviewed by Dr Luca Moretti

autoinflammatory pericarditis is pericardial inflammation in which dysregulated activation of innate immunity plays a predominant role. It may be a manifestation of a defined systemic disease, such as a periodic fever syndrome, or describe a phenotype of recurrent pericarditis with an intense inflammatory response and sensitivity to interleukin-1 blockade. These two situations are biologically related, but are not equivalent diagnostically, genetically, or prognostically.

The diagnosis does not derive simply from negative autoantibodies or a response to a drug. It is necessary to document the pericardial disease, exclude alternative causes, and establish whether a systemic syndrome is present. The autoimmune pericarditis has a different framework, often linked to connective tissue diseases or vasculitides, whereas in recurrent pericarditis the term primarily describes the temporal pattern. A recurrence alone does not demonstrate a monogenic defect.

The value of an autoinflammatory assessment lies in linking episodes to a mechanism and, when possible, to an identifiable disease. This makes it possible to prevent flares, reduce corticosteroid dependence, and monitor systemic complications that do not belong to common isolated pericarditis. Therapy should be built around the clinical phenotype and the quality of evidence available for the specific condition.

Etiology, associated syndromes, and significance of the phenotype

familial Mediterranean fever is a disease associated with variants in the MEFV gene, which encodes pyrin. Attacks involve fever and serositis, more often peritoneal or pleural; pericardial involvement is possible but is not the dominant manifestation. Family origin, early onset, recurrent abdominal episodes, and arthritis may raise suspicion. Origin from a higher-prevalence population increases probability, but is not mandatory and does not replace clinical assessment.

TRAPS, tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic syndrome, is linked to TNFRSF1A variants and may present with prolonged episodes of fever, muscle pain, skin manifestations, and serositis. Other diseases include mevalonate kinase deficiency, associated with MVK, and cryopyrin-associated periodic syndromes, often linked to NLRP3. The frequency and importance of pericarditis differ among these conditions: the existence of a common inflammatory pathway does not justify considering their cardiac manifestations identical.

Still disease includes systemic forms with juvenile onset and adult-onset disease. Fever, rash, arthritis, and intense systemic inflammation may be accompanied by pleuropericarditis. The presentation requires exclusion of infections, neoplasms, and other conditions that cause fever and hyperferritinemia. In severe forms, myocarditis or macrophage activation syndrome may become more relevant than serositis. The presence of pericarditis should therefore not restrict treatment to the heart when multiorgan disease is active.

Among acquired forms, the VEXAS syndrome is associated with somatic UBA1 variants and may enter the differential diagnosis in an adult with persistent inflammation, cytopenias or macrocytic anemia, chondritis, and other systemic manifestations. It is not a cause to be investigated indiscriminately in every pericarditis. Its importance lies in showing that autoinflammation may arise from an acquired hematopoietic clone, without family history, and may require a hematologic assessment different from that of classic inherited syndromes.

In recurrent idiopathic pericarditis, fever, elevated C-reactive protein, effusion, and recurrences during steroid tapering may delineate an inflammatory phenotype compatible with a role for interleukin-1. Clinical and genetic studies support overlap with autoinflammation, but in most patients it is neither necessary nor possible to identify a single causal mutation. The term idiopathic remains appropriate when evaluation does not identify a systemic disease, even if the therapeutically relevant mechanism is better characterized.

The triggering factors may include intercurrent infections, physical stressors, and treatment changes, with variable associations among patients and syndromes. A trigger is not the same as the biological cause and does not demonstrate persistent pericardial infection. Temporal reconstruction should distinguish the initial episode, remissions, and flares, verifying that each event is truly pericardial. This precision avoids converting a sequence of heterogeneous chest pains into an unsupported genetic or immunologic diagnosis.

Pathogenesis and pathophysiology of sterile inflammation

innate immunity recognizes microbial signals and signals of cellular injury through receptors and intracellular systems. In autoinflammatory conditions, the activation threshold or the ability to switch off the response may be altered, with excessive production of mediators even without active infection. The pericardium may become a site of the response, but the same biological pathway may involve skin, joints, and other serosal surfaces. Organ distribution depends on the disease and cannot be predicted solely from the name of the cytokine involved.

The inflammasome is a complex that promotes caspase-1 activation and maturation of cytokines such as interleukin-1 beta. Experimental data on the NLRP3 system help explain amplification of pericardial inflammation. However, not all syndromes result from an NLRP3 mutation: pyrin and other regulatory pathways may converge on similar mediators. A unifying explanation for drug effects should not erase molecular differences among diseases or turn an experimental model into an individual diagnostic test.

interleukin-1 promotes endothelial activation, leukocyte recruitment, and the acute-phase response. Tissue injury may release additional signals that maintain the inflammatory circuit even after the initial stimulus disappears. The distinction between interleukin-1 alpha and beta is pharmacologically relevant because available agents do not all act in the same way. Clinical response to pathway blockade supports its functional role, but does not prove a particular genetic variant or a specific inherited syndrome.

In the pericardium, edema and exudation alter sliding of the pericardial layers and may cause pain, friction rub, and effusion. Pain intensity does not directly measure fluid volume; a very painful serositis may have only a minimal effusion. Increased intrapericardial pressure instead depends on the rate of accumulation and distensibility. Tamponade, although not the typical outcome of every episode, remains possible and requires hemodynamic management independent of the definition of the immune mechanism.

The subclinical persistence of inflammation may contribute to recurrence when treatment is reduced before adequate control. Blood markers, symptoms, and imaging do not necessarily normalize at the same time. In systemic syndromes, persistent inflammation between attacks may also have extracardiac consequences, especially through prolonged production of serum amyloid A. This risk applies to specific diseases and should not be automatically attributed to recurrent idiopathic pericarditis, in which the clinical burden is often dominated by recurrences and treatment.

pericardial fibrosis is not an inevitable consequence of numerous episodes. In idiopathic forms, the risk of constriction is generally low, whereas the prognosis of systemic syndromes also depends on other organs. Persistent limitation of filling nonetheless requires assessment with functional imaging. Coexisting myocarditis changes the risk of arrhythmias and ventricular dysfunction and should be recognized separately, because control of pericardial pain does not guarantee resolution of myocardial injury.

Clinical manifestations and targeted history

The pericardial presentation includes respiratory or positional pain, friction rub, electrocardiographic changes, and possible effusion. Fever and elevated inflammatory markers may be marked but are not specific to autoinflammation. Presentation may be acute, incessant, or recurrent. A new flare after remission must be distinguished from symptoms that never fully resolved, because natural history, interpretation of response, and maintenance decisions also depend on this temporal distinction.

An history of attacks should accurately record age at first episode, duration of fever, symptom-free intervals, simultaneous symptoms, and test results during flares. Abdominal episodes, pleuritis, arthritis, myalgia, or rash may precede recognition of cardiac involvement by years. Attack duration helps orient among different syndromes but is not an absolute rule. A clinical diary with temperatures, medications, and objective manifestations may make periodicity more recognizable than an imprecise retrospective recollection.

The family history includes recurrent fevers, serositis, unexplained renal failure, and diagnoses of amyloidosis. Consanguinity and ancestry are also useful to reconstruct, while avoiding reduction of suspicion to an ethnic label. Absence of family history does not exclude a genetic disease because of variable penetrance, de novo variants, or mosaicism; ordinary familial transmission is not expected in acquired somatic forms. Genealogic information guides counseling, but does not by itself confirm or exclude the diagnosis.

In Still disease, quotidian fever, rash associated with fever spikes, sore throat, and arthritis may accompany serositis. Deterioration with cytopenias, liver dysfunction, coagulopathy, or very high ferritin requires consideration of macrophage activation syndrome. Recognition should not wait for perfect classification of the pericarditis. Likewise, neurologic manifestations, hearing loss, or other characteristic findings may point to a different systemic syndrome and require dedicated investigations beyond echocardiography.

The response to treatment provides information, provided dose, duration, adherence, and goals are known. Recurrences during steroid tapering do not automatically demonstrate colchicine resistance if colchicine was not taken correctly or was not tolerated. A rapid response to an interleukin-1 inhibitor does not eliminate the need to reassess diagnosis and infection when new manifestations arise. The therapeutic course should be interpreted as part of the clinical history, without turning it into a self-sufficient etiologic criterion.

On physical examination, hemodynamic stability, jugular veins, friction rub, and respiratory findings are assessed together with skin, joints, lymph nodes, and organomegaly. Disproportionate tachycardia, hypotension, oliguria, and increasing dyspnea require urgent echocardiography. In a patient already receiving immunomodulation, new fever may be infectious even if previous episodes were sterile. Evaluation must preserve this diagnostic openness: recognizing an autoinflammatory disease does not make every subsequent febrile event a flare of the same condition.

Pericardial diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and genetic assessment

The first objective is documentation of inflammation. ECG, echocardiography, and acute-phase markers accompany clinical examination; troponin and ventricular function help identify a myocardial component. A normal ECG or absence of fluid does not exclude pericarditis, whereas an isolated small effusion is insufficient for diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging may clarify edema and pericardial enhancement in uncertain or recurrent cases, integrating the data without replacing clinical judgment on current activity.

The inflammatory profile includes a complete blood count, C-reactive protein, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate, with ferritin or serum amyloid A when required by the systemic question. Results should be compared between attacks and remission. An elevated marker may be due to infection, neoplasia, or another inflammatory process; a normal value during treatment does not prove absence of disease. Renal and liver function and urinalysis help identify associated involvement and define the safety of subsequent drug choices.

The differential diagnosis includes tuberculosis, bacterial or viral infections according to context, neoplasia, and autoimmune diseases. Selected autoantibodies may be useful when there are signs of connective tissue disease, but their negativity does not confirm autoinflammation. Fever, neutrophilia, and elevated ferritin do not exclude infection. Before cytokine blockade, a workup proportionate to risk is required, especially with large effusion, immunosuppression, epidemiologic exposure, or symptoms that do not match previous episodes.

genetic counseling is particularly relevant when there is early onset, family history, periodic fevers, multiple serositis, or syndromic manifestations. Indiscriminate testing for all variants is not indicated in every recurrence. A targeted panel may include MEFV, TNFRSF1A, MVK, and NLRP3 according to the phenotype; in other scenarios a specific test, such as UBA1, is considered. Sample choice and testing technique are important in mosaicism, in which a routine method may fail to detect a variant present in only a limited proportion of cells.

The interpretation of variants should distinguish pathogenic alterations, reduced-penetrance variants, and variants of uncertain significance. A genetic result that is not coherent with the phenotype should not automatically become the explanation for the presentation. Conversely, a negative test does not eliminate all possibilities of autoinflammatory disease, because technical and biological limits are not equivalent to absence of the process. Results should be discussed with appropriate expertise, avoiding conversion of an incidental finding into a definitive familial diagnosis.

The classification criteria for periodic syndromes or Still disease may organize information, but are not interchangeable with an individual diagnosis or with demonstration of pericarditis. Pericardiocentesis or biopsy is reserved for clinical, hemodynamic, and etiologic indications; ordinary inflammatory histology rarely identifies an autoinflammatory syndrome. The workup should conclude by specifying whether there is a defined systemic disease, a suspicion still requiring clarification, or recurrent pericarditis with an inflammatory phenotype without a demonstrated monogenic etiology.

Definition of activity and conventional therapy

Before defining the strategy, it is necessary to measure the disease burden: number of documented episodes, duration, hospitalizations, cumulative corticosteroid dose, and limitation of daily life. The number of reported chest pain episodes does not necessarily equal the number of inflammatory recurrences. In systemic syndromes, activity between attacks and organ involvement are added. Goals include control of the episode, prevention of flares, and reduction of toxicity, rather than merely temporary normalization of temperature.

For the pericardial episode, aspirin or NSAIDs and colchicine remain a therapeutic foundation when appropriate and not contraindicated. Treatment should use an anti-inflammatory dose and sufficient duration, with tapering after clinical and objective control. Renal function, gastrointestinal risk, and drug interactions may require modifications. In recurrent pericarditis, colchicine is generally continued for at least six months, with individualized prolongation; this strategy is not the same as the continuous prophylaxis required by some systemic autoinflammatory diseases.

In familial Mediterranean fever, daily colchicine is fundamental to prevent attacks and damage from persistent inflammation, including AA amyloidosis. It should not be taken only when pain appears. Before declaring resistance, adherence, the maximum tolerated dose, interactions, and residual activity are assessed; intolerance and lack of efficacy are distinct problems. Continuing colchicine may remain indicated even when a biologic is added, according to the specialist plan, because treatment addresses the systemic disease and not only the pericardium.

corticosteroids can rapidly control inflammation, but prolonged exposure increases the risk of dependence, recurrences during tapering, and cumulative harm. In isolated pericarditis they are preferably limited when alternatives exist; in severe systemic forms, the dose is also determined by other organs. Tapering should be gradual and accompanied by a maintenance strategy. Repeated short courses of high doses without a preventive plan may produce an alternation of rapid benefit and flare that worsens the overall burden.

Still disease requires a systemic approach, in which recent recommendations emphasize early control of interleukin-1 or interleukin-6 pathways and reduction of steroid exposure. The choice depends on phenotype and complications. Macrophage activation syndrome is a distinct emergency, not simply pericarditis resistant to colchicine. Other periodic syndromes likewise require their own plans: a drug effective in familial Mediterranean fever is not automatically sufficient for TRAPS or mevalonate kinase deficiency.

monitoring before escalation includes confirmation of active inflammation, investigation for relevant infections, a complete blood count, and organ function. Vaccinations, pregnancy or reproductive plans, and concomitant therapies should be considered. Tamponade should be treated with decompression when indicated, without waiting for an immunologic response. Mechanical control and inflammatory control are complementary: drainage does not correct susceptibility to recurrence, whereas an effective cytokine-pathway drug does not guarantee sufficiently rapid decompression in an unstable patient.

Interleukin-1 blockade and management of refractory forms

cytokine blockade has a particular rationale in recurrent forms with documented inflammatory activity, colchicine resistance, or corticosteroid dependence, after adequate exclusion of infection. Selection should not be based solely on subjective pain intensity. AIRTRIP and RHAPSODY and the IRAP registry changed management of selected patients, but did not demonstrate that every pericardial pain syndrome or every inherited syndrome responds to the same agent with an identical benefit-risk profile.

Anakinra antagonizes the interleukin-1 receptor. In adults with recurrent pericarditis it has commonly been studied at 100 mg subcutaneously daily, with adjustments according to weight, renal function, and clinical context. Severe renal impairment requires particular attention to the dosing interval. Local reactions, infections, and hematologic or hepatic abnormalities should be monitored. Clinical indication, regulatory authorization, and availability are not synonymous: use should be embedded in a specialist pathway consistent with local conditions.

Rilonacept intercepts interleukin-1 alpha and beta through a fusion protein. In the pivotal study, the adult regimen consisted of a 320 mg loading dose followed by 160 mg weekly. The design with an initial treatment phase followed by randomization of responders supports efficacy in maintaining response in the selected population; it does not demonstrate equivalence with anakinra, nor does it allow simplistic indirect comparisons between percentages from different studies. Infections, injection-site reactions, and lipid profile are included in monitoring.

Canakinumab, directed against interleukin-1 beta, has clinical evidence in periodic fever syndromes, including colchicine-resistant familial Mediterranean fever phenotypes, TRAPS, and mevalonate kinase deficiency. These results concern control of systemic disease and are not equivalent to a large trial specific to recurrent idiopathic pericarditis. Choice among agents should therefore begin with diagnosis and relevant evidence, as well as age, comorbidities, route of administration, and monitoring feasibility.

The duration of therapy is not defined by a universal number of months. Initial response may be rapid, whereas maintenance and tapering require clinical stability and objective control. Abrupt discontinuation may promote recurrence in patients still dependent on pathway blockade. Observational data on tapering regimens should not be converted into an individual guarantee. Tapering of corticosteroids and other drugs is coordinated to identify true therapeutic need without exposing patients to avoidable flares.

In the event of lack of response, diagnosis, dose, adherence, and presence of inflammation are reassessed. Intercurrent infection, noninflammatory pain, and uncontrolled systemic disease require different decisions. Empirical combination of multiple biologics is not an ordinary solution and may increase infectious risk. A patient with a defined genetic syndrome, VEXAS, or complicated Still disease may need treatment directed at the underlying disease, whereas isolated pericarditis without objective activity primarily requires avoiding escalation without a demonstrated target.

Prognosis, complications, and long-term surveillance

The cardiac prognosis of recurrent idiopathic forms is often good with respect to the risk of permanent structural damage, but the burden of recurrences, pain, and treatment may be substantial. The prognosis of a systemic syndrome cannot be inferred from that of isolated pericarditis. Myocardial involvement, renal disease, persistent inflammation, and hematologic complications may influence outcome even when effusion is modest. Follow-up should therefore distinguish pericardial control from overall disease control.

AA amyloidosis is a complication of prolonged inflammation in some autoinflammatory syndromes and is particularly relevant in inadequately controlled familial Mediterranean fever. Proteinuria and renal function abnormalities require evaluation; serum amyloid A may contribute to surveillance when available and relevant. The risk should not be generalized to everyone with pericardial recurrences. Prevention is based on continuous control of the disease and adherence, not only on treatment of painful episodes.

macrophage activation syndrome deserves attention in Still disease and other appropriate settings. Persistent fever, cytopenias, liver disease, and coagulopathy require rapid investigation, especially if the course differs from usual flares. Ferritin is one element of the picture, not a stand-alone diagnosis. Cardiac involvement may accompany a critical systemic condition requiring urgent multidisciplinary management, without waiting for evolution of an effusion or the appearance of hemodynamic criteria for tamponade.

drug-related complications include colchicine toxicity, corticosteroid-related harm, and infections during immunomodulation. Persistent diarrhea, muscle weakness, cytopenias, or hepatic abnormalities require reassessment of doses and interactions. Preventive monitoring should be individualized and documented. New fever during cytokine blockade may present differently from before treatment; neither a modestly elevated marker nor a previous autoinflammatory diagnosis should delay investigation for a clinically plausible infection.

pericardial surveillance uses symptoms, physical examination, biomarkers, and echocardiography according to severity. Magnetic resonance imaging may be useful when discordance persists or a complex taper is being considered, but it is not required at fixed intervals for everyone. Residual enhancement, pain, and active inflammation are not perfect synonyms. Return to physical activity is planned after control of the episode and takes into account any myocardial injury, which requires a different risk assessment.

continuity of care is particularly important in inherited diseases, with family counseling and organized transition from pediatric to adult care when necessary. A shared plan defines background therapy, management during flares, and warning signs for earlier review. Quality of life, sleep, work or school participation, and injection burden should be considered together with biomarkers. Successful care consists of maintaining sustainable remission while preventing injury and recurrences with proportionate treatment exposure.

References
1. Schulz-Menger J et al. 2025 ESC Guidelines for the management of myocarditis and pericarditis. European Heart Journal. 2025;46(40):3952-4041.
2. Klein AL et al. Pericardial Diseases: International Position Statement on New Concepts and Advances in Multimodality Cardiac Imaging. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2024;17(8):937-988.
3. Adler Y et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of pericardial diseases: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Pericardial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Endorsed by: The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). European Heart Journal. 2015;36(42):2921-2964.
4. Peet CJ et al. Pericarditis and Autoinflammation: A Clinical and Genetic Analysis of Patients With Idiopathic Recurrent Pericarditis and Monogenic Autoinflammatory Diseases at a National Referral Center. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2022;11(11):e024931.
5. Mauro AG et al. The Role of NLRP3 Inflammasome in Pericarditis: Potential for Therapeutic Approaches. JACC: Basic to Translational Science. 2021;6(2):137-150.
6. Ozen S et al. EULAR/PReS endorsed recommendations for the management of familial Mediterranean fever (FMF): 2024 update. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2025;84(6):899-909.
7. Romano M et al. The 2021 EULAR/American College of Rheumatology points to consider for diagnosis, management and monitoring of the interleukin-1 mediated autoinflammatory diseases: cryopyrin-associated periodic syndromes, tumour necrosis factor receptor-associated periodic syndrome, mevalonate kinase deficiency, and deficiency of the interleukin-1 receptor antagonist. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2022;81(7):907-921.
8. Fautrel B et al. EULAR/PReS recommendations for the diagnosis and management of Still’s disease, comprising systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis and adult-onset Still’s disease. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2024;83(12):1614-1627.
9. Beck DB et al. Somatic Mutations in UBA1 and Severe Adult-Onset Autoinflammatory Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020;383(27):2628-2638.
10. Imazio M et al. A randomized trial of colchicine for acute pericarditis. New England Journal of Medicine. 2013;369(16):1522-1528.
11. Brucato A et al. Effect of Anakinra on Recurrent Pericarditis Among Patients With Colchicine Resistance and Corticosteroid Dependence: The AIRTRIP Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2016;316(18):1906-1912.
12. Imazio M et al. Anakinra for corticosteroid-dependent and colchicine-resistant pericarditis: The IRAP (International Registry of Anakinra for Pericarditis) study. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology. 2020;27(9):956-964.
13. Klein AL et al. Phase 3 Trial of Interleukin-1 Trap Rilonacept in Recurrent Pericarditis. New England Journal of Medicine. 2021;384(1):31-41.
14. De Benedetti F et al. Canakinumab for the Treatment of Autoinflammatory Recurrent Fever Syndromes. New England Journal of Medicine. 2018;378(20):1908-1919.
15. European Medicines Agency. Kineret: European public assessment report and product information. European Medicines Agency. n.d. Institutional online resource. Accessed September 26, 2026. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/kineret.
16. U.S. National Library of Medicine. COLCHICINE tablet, film coated: prescribing information. DailyMed. n.d. Accessed September 26, 2026. https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/drugInfo.cfm?setid=50b9c910-49a3-4a57-80f5-dc36c09da4df.
17. Imazio M et al. Risk of constrictive pericarditis after acute pericarditis. Circulation. 2011;124(11):1270-1275.
18. Brucato A et al. Interleukin-1 Trap Rilonacept Improved Health-Related Quality of Life and Sleep in Patients With Recurrent Pericarditis: Results From the Phase 3 Clinical Trial RHAPSODY. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2022;11(20):e023252.