Search

Background: Clinical experience on details of CRRT initiation and outcomes in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) patients is not available from developing countries like India. This study shares the 5-year clinical experience of managing CICU patients requiring CRRT in a tertiary care cardiac center of North India. Materials and methods: Medical records of all CICU patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) managed by CRRT from October 2011 to September 2016 at tertiary referral center in North India were retrospectively reviewed. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of post-CRRT mortality. Results: A total of 630 patients received CRRT during the study period. Most commonly AKI developed in patients with acute coronary syndrome (30.2 %) with cardiogenic shock. 55.9 % of the CRRT patients were >60 years of age, and/or on multiple supports in ICU including, mechanical ventilation, high doses of inotropes & vasopressors and other cardiovascular support. Of those on CRRT, 130 (20.6 %) patients had died, 215 (34.1 %) were discharged and 285 (45.2 %) could not complete the desired course. Multivariate regression analysis showed independent association of mortality with high vasoactive-inotropic score, single CRRT cycle and low mean arterial pressure in CRRT patients. Conclusion: About 34.1 % of patients receiving CRRT were alive at discharge, emphasizing the feasibility and utility of CRRT as a promising modality in this population for improving outcomes.

An echocardiographic investigation is one of the key modalities of diagnosis in cardiology. There has been a rising presence of cardiological comorbidities in patients positive for COVID-19. Hence, it is becoming extremely essential to look into the correct safety precautions, healthcare professionals must take while conducting an echo investigation. The decision matrix formulated for conducting an echocardiographic evaluation is based on presence or absence of cardiological comorbidity vis-à-vis positive, suspected or negative for COVID-19. The safety measures have been constructed keeping in mind the current safety precautions by WHO, CDC and MoHFW, India.

The unprecedented and rapidly spreading Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged public health care systems globally. Based on worldwide experience, India has initiated a nationwide lockdown to prevent the exponential surge of cases. During COVID-19, management of cardiovascular emergencies like acute Myocardial Infarction (MI) may be compromised. Cardiological Society of India (CSI) has ventured in this moment of crisis to evolve a consensus document for care of acute MI. However, this care should be individualized, based on local expertise and governmental advisories.

Objective: Hypertension is the most important risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. There is limited data on hypertension prevalence in India. This study was conducted to estimate the prevalence of hypertension among Indian adults. Methods: A national level survey was conducted with fixed one-day blood pressure measurement camps across 24 states and union territories of India. Hypertension was defined as systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥140 mmHg or a diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg or on treatment for hypertension. The prevalence was age- and gender-standardized according to the 2011 census population of India. Results: Blood pressure was recorded for 180,335 participants (33.2% women; mean age 40.6 ± 14.9 years). Among them, 8,898 (4.9%), 99,791 (55.3%), 35,694 (11.9%), 23,084 (12.8%), 9,989 (5.5%), and 2,878 (1.6%) participants were of the age group 18–19, 20–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65–74, and ≥ 75 years, respectively. Overall prevalence of hypertension was 30.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 30.5, 30.9) and the prevalence among women was 23.7% (95% CI: 23.3, 24). Prevalence adjusted for 2011 census population and the WHO reference population was 29.7% and 32.8%, respectively. Conclusion: There is a high prevalence of hypertension, with almost one in every three Indian adult affected. Keywords: Hypertension, India, Prevalence

Background: The impact of the 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for diagnosis and management of hypertension on the prevalence of hypertension in India is unknown. Methods: We analyzed data from the Cardiac Prevent 2015 survey to estimate the change in the prevalence of hypertension. The JNC8 guidelines defined hypertension as a systolic blood pressure of ≥140 ​mmHg or diastolic blood pressure of ≥90 ​mmHg. The 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines define hypertension as a systolic blood pressure of ≥130 ​mmHg or diastolic blood pressure of ≥80 ​mmHg. We standardized the prevalence as per the 2011 census population of India. We also calculated the prevalence as per the World Health Organization (WHO) World Standard Population (2000–2025). Results: Among 180,335 participants (33.2% women), the mean age was 40.6 ​± ​14.9 years (41.1 ​± ​15.0 and 39.7 ​± ​14.7 years in men and women, respectively). Among them, 8,898 (4.9%), 99,791 (55.3%), 35,694 (11.9%), 23,084 (12.8%), 9,989 (5.5%) and 2,878 (1.6%) participants belonged to age group 18–19, 20–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65–74 and ​≥ ​75 years respectively. The prevalence of hypertension according to the JNC8 and 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines was 29.7% and 63.8%, respectively- an increase of 115%. With the 2011 census population of India, this suggests that currently, 486 million Indian adults have hypertension according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines, an addition of 260 million as compared to the JNC8 guidelines. Conclusion: According to the 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines, 3 in every 5 Indian adults have hypertension.

Introduction: Hypertension is directly responsible for 57% of all stroke deaths and 24% of all coronary heart disease deaths in India. Appropriate blood pressure measurement techniques are the cornerstone of clinical acumen. Despite the clear guidelines on BP measurement technique, there seems to be large inter-observer variations. Aim & methods: A prospective, observational study was done to assess the knowledge and to study the current practices of office BP measurement among the 400 medical and paramedical staff working in various hospitals of a northern district of India. A single observer under the supervision of investigators observed all the participants and a proforma was filled based on AHA guidelines. After observing BP measurement technique scoring was done (≤8 question correct = inaccurate practices, >9 questions correct = accurate practices). Similarly, the knowledge was assessed by giving a pretested questionnaire. Results: 5.85 % of the medical staff had excellent knowledge and 80% of the doctors and 62% of the paramedical staff had good knowledge about BPM. Only 1.47% (3 doctors) and 0.5% (1 nurse) had accurate practices. There was no correlation between knowledge and practices. Conclusions: We conclude that the right technique and knowledge of blood pressure measurement among community health providers is inadequate and warrants further interventions to improve.

Background: The PANARrhythMia and Heart Failure Registry (PANARM HF) characterized demographic, clinical and interventional therapy indication profiles of cardiac arrhythmia (CA) and heart failure (HF) patients in India. Methods: Consulting Physicians (CP) who medically manage CA and HF patients enrolled patients with one or more of the following: syncope, pre-syncope, dyspnea, palpitation, fatigue and LV dysfunction. The CPs were trained by interventional cardiologists (IC) to identify CA/HF patients indicated for implantable device/radiofrequency ablation (RFA). 59 CP’s, 16 IC’s & 2205 patients from 12 cities participated. Demographic, clinical, device/RFA indication and referral-consultation profiles were created. IC’s provided device/RFA recommendations based on these profiles. Results: The CA/HF distribution of patients was: HF – 58%, bradyarrhythmia – 15%, atrial fibrillation – 15%, other supraventricular tachyarrhythmia – 10% and ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation – 4.5%. 62% of the CA/HF population was male and 45% were below age 60. Coronary artery disease (52%), hypertension (44%), diabetes (30%) & myocardial infarction (20%) were prominent. 1011 (46%) of the CA/HF population were potential device/RFA candidates according to the IC’s. However, only 700 (69%) of these patients were referred to the IC by the CP. Of referred patients, only 177 (25%) consulted the IC and were recommended therapy. Thus, 824 (83%) of patients indicated for interventional therapy were not advised therapy or did not opt for it. Conclusion: The India PANARM HF study provides new information and insights into the demographic, clinical, interventional therapy, referral and consultation pattern profiles of CA/HF patients in India.