Dataset Information

Epidemiological profile, management and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndrome: Single centre experience from a tertiary care hospital in North India.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in India. Our aim is to study the clinical, epidemiological profile and in-hospital outcomes of patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome.

Methods

We did a prospective single center observational study of the 1203 patients presenting with ACS to a tertiary referral center in North India over a period of one year (July 2018-June 2019).

Results

The mean age of study population was 58.4 ± 12.5 years. STEMI and NSTE-ACS accounted for 69.9% and 31.1% respectively. 62.1% of our patients were from rural background. The median time to hospital admission was 600 min for STEMI patients, thrombolysis was performed in 52% of cases. Cardiogenic shock at presentation was noted in 18%. Coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention were done in 1062 (88.3%) and 733 (60.9%) patients respectively. The overall in-hospital mortality was 7.6%. STEMI patients had higher mortality than NSTE-ACS (8.9% vs 4.5% p < 0.001). Female gender (OR-3.306 C.I. 1.87-5.845), severe MR (OR-4.65, C.I.-1.187-18.18), acute kidney injury (AKI) at admission (OR-5.15, C.I.-2.5-10.63), higher Killip class (class III/IV) (OR-3.378,C.I.-1.292-8.849), AF (OR-3.25, C.I.-1,18-8.92), complete heart block (CHB) (OR-4.44,C.I.-2.09-9.43) and right bundle branch block (RBBB) (OR-2.86, C.I.-1.2-6.8) were significant predictors of in hospital mortality.

Conclusions

Our study represents the predominance of STEMI as the initial ACS presentation with a considerable delay in first medical contact and higher prevalence of cardiogenic shock (CS). STEMI patients had higher mortality. Female sex, severe MR, AKI, higher Killips class, AF, CHB, RBBB being predictors of high in-hospital mortality in ACS patients.

SUBMITTER: Sharma YP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8065348 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTeledermatology has evolved as a valuable option to outpatient visits during the current pandemic. We set up a smartphone-based hybrid model of teledermatology services providing direct care to patients at our center. To analyse patient and physician-experience and acceptability for teledermatology over a 6-month-period, along with clinicodemographic profile of patients.MethodologySingle-center, retrospective study conducted from May 20, 2020 to October 31, 2020. Patient satisfaction level for teledermatology was assessed on a 4-point scale and compared with the satisfaction level during their previous physical visits prior to COVID-19 pandemic. A physician assessment form was utilised to record the experience of dermatologists while providing teledermatology services.ResultsOf 7530 patients registered, a successful consult was provided to 6125 patients (81.34%). Average number of teleconsultations/day rose from 23.60 in May 2020 to 77.96 in October 2020. Mean age of patients availing teledermatology services was 33.60 ± 16.99 years. Average distance to care and travel time were 100.90 ± 171.77 km and 135 ± 222.32 min, respectively. A definitive diagnosis could be ascertained in 5724 patients (93.45%) and in-person visit was recommended to 133 patients (2.2%). Out of 6125 patients, 5229 could be contacted for feedback, 935 (18.18%), 2230 (42.65%), 1749 (33.45%), and 300 patients (5.70%) reported being very satisfied, satisfied, partially satisfied, and unsatisfied, respectively. Of 1914 patients, who had availed in-person OPD facilities prior to the pandemic, 914 patients (49.62%) preferred in-person visits. Of 34 dermatologists surveyed, 88.2% felt comfortable providing teleconsultations and 82.4% felt the need to continue teledermatology services in the upcoming months.ConclusionsOverall, teledermatology is a valid alternative for in-person dermatology visits during the current crisis; helping with initial triage and further patient management. Further refinement of the process could lead to even more acceptability.

Project description:Despite rapidly evolving knowledge about COVID 19 infection, routes of perinatal COVID 19 transmission and viral load in mother neonate dyad remain uncertain. Data were analysed to describe the clinicodemographic profile and viral load in neonates born to COVID 19 positive mothers. Of 2947 deliveries, 69 mothers were COVID 19 positive (2.3%), with 1 abortion, 2 macerated stillbirths and 2 fresh stillbirths as pregnancy outcomes. Of 65 tested neonates, 10.7% (7) were confirmed COVID 19 positive by RTPCR (reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction). Viral load (cycle threshold, Ct of E, RDRp) in neonates was comparable with the Ct reported from adults; however, neonates had milder clinical manifestations. All 7 neonates who tested positive for COVID 19 were subsequently discharged. Six of the 7 neonates were asymptomatic and 1 neonate needed respiratory support (indication being prematurity) which resolved after 48 h. Maternal and neonatal comparison of Ct of E and RdRp gene was statistically non-significant (25.97 vs 19.68, p = 0.34 and 26.5 vs 25.0, p = 0.84). Viral loads of mothers with COVID 19 positive neonates compared with mothers with COVID 19 negative neonates for E and RdRp gene were also statistically non-significant (25 vs 27.19, p = 0.63 and 19.6 vs 27.6, p = 0.08). The majority (93%) of neonates tested later than 48 h (roomed in with mother and breastfed) tested negative.Conclusion: The study supports milder manifestation in COVID 19 positive neonates. Risk of transmission from COVID 19 positive mother to neonate by rooming-in and breastfeeding is low. In this study on a limited number of neonates, maternal viral load was not found to be associated with the positivity status or severity of the illness of neonate. What is Known: • Neonates born to COVID 19 positive mothers are at risk of COVID 19 infection. What is New: • Risk of transmission of COVID 19 from mother to neonate, with rooming-in and breastfeeding, appears low. • In this study on a limited number of neonates, maternal viral load of COVID 19 (E and RdRp cycle thresholds) was not associated with severity of illness or COVID 19 positivity in neonates.