ABSTRACT
Radial access for cardiac catheterization and intervention in India has been growing steadily over the last decade with favorable clinical outcomes. However, its usage by interventional cardiologists varies greatly among Indian operators and hospitals due to large geographic disparities in health care delivery systems and practice patterns. It also remains unclear whether the advantages, as well as limitations of transradial (TR) intervention (as reported in the western literature), are applicable to developing countries like India or not. An evidence-based review involving various facets of radial procedure for cardiac catheterization, including practical, patient-related and technical issues was conducted by an expert committee that formed a part of Advancing Complex CoronariES Sciences through TransRADIAL intervention (ACCESS RADIAL™) Advisory Board. Emerging challenges in redefining TR management based on evidence supporting practices were discussed to formulate these final recommendations through consensus.
ABSTRACT
Heart failure is a common clinical syndrome and a global health priority. The burden of heart failure is increasing at an alarming rate worldwide as well as in India. Heart failure not only increases the risk of mortality, morbidity and worsens the patient’s quality of life, but also puts a huge burden on the overall healthcare system. The management of heart failure has evolved over the years with the advent of new drugs and devices. This document has been developed with an objective to provide standard management guidance and simple heart failure algorithms to aid Indian clinicians in their daily practice. It would also inform the clinicians on the latest evidence in heart failure and provide guidance to recognize and diagnose chronic heart failure early and optimize management.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Current treatment strategies for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) include concomitant use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) and antithrombotic therapy such as aspirin, clopidogrel, and unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin. The "direct thrombin inhibitor" bivalirudin has been associated with better efficacy and safety than heparin. OBJECTIVE: The present study is performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of an indigenously developed and manufactured bivalirudin (Bivaflo; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Mumbai) as the primary anticoagulation strategy during PCI in moderate-high risk patients with only provisional use of GPI. METHODS: This prospective multicentered registry enrolled 439 patients in 11 tertiary care centers across India. Patients who had ACS or other clinical/angiographic characteristics, which increase risk during PCI, were enrolled in the registry. Bivaflo was administered as a bolus dose of 0.75 mg/kg, followed by infusion at a rate of 1.75 mg/kg/h during the procedure and optionally 0.25 mg/kg/h for 4 hours after the procedure at investigator's discretion. GPI use was discouraged except as bailout. The primary endpoints were composite and individual incidences of death, myocardial infarction (MI), urgent revascularization, subacute stent thrombosis (SAT), or bleeding at day 7/hospital discharge, whichever was earlier. The secondary endpoints were 30-day composite and individual incidences of death, MI, urgent revascularization, and SAT. RESULTS: The mean age of the group was 58 +/- 10 years and 83% were males. Bivaflo was administered for a mean duration of 102 +/- 79 minutes, and 65% patients received Bivaflo infusion post-PCI. ACT values measured at 10 minutes after bolus and at the end of the PCI were found to be 339 +/- 110 and 336 +/- 104 seconds, respectively. GPI was provisionally used in only 4% (16) patients mostly due to new or suspected thrombus and obstructive dissection with decreased flow. At day 7/hospital discharge, there were no incidences of major adverse cardiac events or major bleeding. Minor bleeding occurred in only 4 patients (0.9%). The 30-day composite major adverse cardiac event rate was 0.68%. One death and two subacute thrombosis occurred during the 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSION: Bivaflo is safe and effective sole anticoagulation strategy during PCI of moderate-high risk patients. Bivaflo administration was associated with no major bleeding events and extremely low in hospital and 30-day MACE rate. These rates were lower than expected MACE rates for such a subgroup of patients based on historical controls.