Patterns of Perception of Cardiac Symptoms by Patients Presenting with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and their Knowledge of Coronay Artery Disease Risk Factors.

BACKGROUND: Proper knowledge regarding Coronary Artery Disease and their risk factors is essential for the early recognition of the disease and its presentation. This study was conducted to identify pattern of clinical symptoms and knowledge regarding Coronary Artery Disease risk factors among ST-Elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted among 340 ST-Elevation myocardial infarction patients in the inpatient Cardiology Department of Shahid Gangalal National Heart Centre Nepal, from November 2020 to February 2021. Baseline clinical characteristics, knowledge regarding Coronary Artery Disease risk factors, patterns of symptoms, and prehospital delay were collected and evaluated. RESULTS: In our study, 299 (87.9%) had typical ischemic chest pain during the symptom onset, however, only 81 (23.8%) perceived chest pain as cardiac disease, and 311 (91.5%) of the patients presented to the nearby health care center within the recommended time of less than 12 hours for the reperfusion therapy of ST-Elevation myocardial infarction. Perception of symptoms as a cardiac origin and typical chest pain were not significantly associated with earlier presentation. Also, the typical chest pain was not significantly associated with the perception of the symptom as a cardiac origin. The history of Coronary Artery Disease was considered as a Coronary Artery Disease risk factor by 184(54.1%) of the study population and 137(40.3%), 132(38.8%), 110(32.4%), 105(30.9%) and 71(20.9%) considered hypertension, smoking, age, obesity, and diabetes mellitus as a Coronary Artery Disease risk factor respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Though most patients presented with typical chest pain, identification of the chest pain as a cardiac origin and the awareness of the Coronary Artery Disease risk factors was low.

Safety and Efficacy of Single vs Dual Antiplatelets Therapy After Atrial Septal Defect Device Closure.

BACKGROUND: Atrial septal defect device closure has become a standard procedure. Antiplatelet therapy is used to prevent thrombus formation in the device. There is no clear recommendation about the antiplatelets drugs. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Aspirin vs (Aspirin +Clopidogrel) after device closure. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among all consecutive adult patients (?18 years) who underwent atrial septal defect device closure from May 2019 to April 2020 and meet the inclusion criteria were included. After successful ASD device closure patients were treated with ASA or combination of ASA and Clopidogrel for six months on physician discretion. Patients were followed up for six months to observe for Transient ischemic attack, Stroke, thrombus in the device, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, minor bleeding and increases in headache episodes compared to baseline. RESULTS: This study consisted of 130 patients: 65 in the Aspirin Group, and 65 patients in Aspirin and Clopidogrel group. There was no Transient ischemic attack, Stroke, Myocardial infarction, thrombus, major bleeding in both groups. There was no significant difference between two groups in ecchymosis; Aspirin group 4(6.1%) vs. aspirin and Clopidogrel group 3(4.6%) [Difference, 1.54% {95, % CI, -1.45%to 4.53%}]; P=0.648. There was no significant difference in increase in headache episodes compared to baseline for six months after the device closure in Aspirin Group 3(4.6%) VS Aspirin and Clopidogrel group 2 (3.0%) group [difference, 1.54% {95% CI, -1.45%to 4.53%}]; P=0.648. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that single antiplatelet therapy with Aspirin is as safe and effective as aspirin and clopidogrel after device closure.

Atrial Septal Defect Size and Rims on Transesophageal Echocardiogram.

Background and aims:Rims and size of atrial septal defect (ASD) are crucial for the success of transcatheter ASD closure. The maximal diameter and dimensions of various rims of the ASD are essential for sizing and optimal placement of the device. We aimed to study the size and rims of ASD in our patients. Methods:This was a prospective study that was done at Shahid Gangalal National Heart Centre. All patients aged over 18 and referred to a unit IV in the Department of Cardiology for ASD device closure were included in the study. The study duration was six months, from April to September 2018. The size and rims of ASD were evaluated by transesophageal echocardiogram. Results:During the study, 173 patients underwent transesophageal echocardiogram. Most of them [122 (70.1%)] were women. Age ranged from 18 to 68 (mean, 35 years). The most common symptom was shortness of breath. Twenty-one (12.1%) patients were incidentally detected with ASDs. Sinus rhythm with right bundle branch block was present in 148 (85.5%) subjects. Right atrium and right ventricle were dilated in 162 (93.6%) patients. One patient had dextrocardia with situs inversus. More than half of all patients (54.9%) had mild tricuspid regurgitation. Mean tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient was 39.5±16.8 mm Hg. More than one ASD was present in 11 (6.3%) patients. ASD size ranged from 2 mm to 43 mm in 4-chamber view, 2 mm to 44 mm in short axis view, and 2 mm to 47 mm in bicaval view. The mean ASD size was 18.6±7.7 mm in 4-chamber view, 19.6±8.5 mm in short axis view, and 18.7±8.0 mm in bicaval view. In only 11 (6.4%) patients, all rims were present and not floppy, while in other 11 (6.4%) subjects all rims were present, but floppy. With the exception of aortic rim, all other rims were present and good in 55 (33.9%) patients, while in 45 (27.7%) patients, other rims were present but floppy. Conclusion:Many ASD have absent, inadequate and floppy rims.