RESUMEN
Objective There are two most common incisions that are used during most pacemaker implantation procedures, with the first type of incision being inferior and parallel to the clavicle (Group C) and the second type of incision along the deltopectoral groove (Group D). We evaluated the scars resulting from the two types of incision to objectively evaluate the degree of superiority in cosmetic outcomes, between these two types of incisions. Methods Seventy-six patients who underwent left pre-pectoral pacemaker insertion were evaluated, close to 6 months after the date of the pacemaker implantation, using a simple scoring system based on atrophy, contour and colour of the scar. The likelihood of reduced severity in scar scores were compared between the two groups and the number of patients with elevation or inversion of the scar and with keloid formation were quantified. Results Seventy-six patients, with 47 belonging to the ‘Group C’ and 29 belonging to the ‘Group D’ were evaluated. The average length (C: 25 ± 2 mm; D: 24 ± 3 mm) and thickness (C: 25 ± 3 mm; D: 26 ± 2 mm) of the scars were not significantly different. The mean cumulative total scores in ‘Group C’ (1.98 ± 1.50) and ‘Group D’ (1.93 ± 1.31) were comparable. The odds ratio (OR) estimate showed that outcomes for atrophy (OR:0.73), contour (OR:0.53) and the cumulative total scores (OR:0.72) were also comparable. Conclusion This pilot study showed that the deltopectoral groove incision as a site of incision is comparable to the infraclavicular incision.
RESUMEN
Healthcare provider institutions in India now offer structured health check-up ‘packages’ for routine screening of common diseases. While some tests included within their ambit are in keeping with international and Indian recommendations, some are entirely unwarranted. Unnecessary and inappropriate screening tests may cause more harm than benefit. Besides financial and resource burden, there may be over-diagnosis and over-treatment, psychological distress due to false-positive test results, harm from invasive follow-up tests, and false reassurance due to false-negative test results. Clinicians must ensure a net benefit from tests and interventions in order to efficiently deliver preventive services. We reviewed current screening guidelines for cardiovascular disease and common cancers, and surveyed multiple ‘packages’ provided at 8 centres in Mumbai, India. We put forth our recommendations for routine health screening in asymptomatic adults in India. Natl Med J India 2016;29:18–21