ABSTRACT
Background: Radiation injury is an important concern for interventional cardiologists and needs to be addressed. RADPAD is a radiation protection drape that has been shown to reduce the radiation exposure of the primary operator (PO). While Indian data on radiation exposure of the PO in the cath lab are scarce, the exposure of the secondary operator (SO) is even less well studied. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of RADPAD drapes in reducing radiation doses in the cath lab for the primary as well as the secondary operator. Methods: A total of 160 patients (40 patients each with single vessel disease [SVD], double vessel disease [DVD] and triple vessel disease [TVD] undergoing coronary angioplasty, and 40 patients undergoing balloon mitral valvuloplasty [BMV]) were randomised in a 1:1 pattern to undergo a procedure with or without the use of RADPAD. Results: For patients with SVD, DVD and TVD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and those undergoing BMV, the % reduction with the use of RADPAD reduced the PO's received dose (in mrem) by 65%, 54%, 28% and 67%, respectively, as compared to without RADPAD. The % reduction in relative operator exposure for the PO for the 4 groups was 55%, 34%, 18% and 75%, respectively, with the use of RADPAD. The corresponding % reduction for the SO's received dose (in mrem) was 80%, 63%, 33% and 69% and for relative operator exposure was 74%, 46%, 23% and 76% in the 4 groups, respectively. Conclusions: RADPAD significantly reduces the radiation exposure of the primary and secondary operator during prolonged complex PCI and BMV procedures.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Ivabradine may have a role in rate control of atrial fibrillation (AF) due to effects on HCN channels in AV node. We studied role of Ivabradine in rate control of rheumatic AF. METHODS: 80 patients, rheumatic AF, HR > 100 bpm (age 47 ± 11 yrs, AF duration 6.8 ± 2.9 years, rate 131 ± 16 bpm) on maximally tolerated ßß or CCB's, randomized to Ivabradine or escalated ßß/CCB. Ivabradine started @ 2.5 mg BD; increased to 5 mg BD if inadequate response at 1 week (failure to decrease HR < 10% vs baseline). After Holter at 1 month, dose escalated to 7.5 mg BD if needed. RESULTS: Ivabradine resulted in significantly lower HR (81 ± 10 vs 99 ± 9) at 3 months and 6 months (79 ± 8 vs 94 ± 8, p < 0.001). Absolute reduction in HR: 56 ± 15 vs 31 ± 14 bpm and % change in HR: 41 ± 7 vs 24 ± 9%, both p < 0.00001). At 6 months, Ivabradine group had. 1Significantly lower NT Pro BNP (1168 vs 1314 pg/ml), higher 6 min walk distance (410 ± 47 vs 349 ± 54 m, all p < 0.001) 2Better symptom class (EHRA score 1: asymptomatic 84% vs 40%), improvement >1 EHRA class; baseline 60% vs 17% 3Better LA Strain (22.8 ± 2.8% vs 20.6 ± 2.5%) Ivabradine was well tolerated and there was no drug withdrawal. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that Ivabradine can be an option for rate control in rheumatic AF.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have proved the importance of intact lateral trochanteric wall, thus buttressing/fixing the broken lateral trochanteric wall irrespective of the implant, is likely to improve the alignment and outcome. We compared the outcome of lateral wall buttressing by trochanteric buttress plate (TBP) supplemented to proximal femoral nailing versus proximal femoral nailing alone in patients of broken lateral wall intertrochanteric fractures. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Sixty patients of intertrochanteric factures (IT) of femur with broken lateral wall were randomized into group A or B and were treated with either proximal femoral nail (PFN) alone or proximal femoral nail augmented with trochanteric buttress plate (PFN + TBP), respectively. The TBP plate used was primarily fixed to proximal femur via 8 mm hip screw and 6.4 mm antirotation screw of the PFN. Operative time, blood loss, radiation exposure, quality of reduction, functional outcome, union time, and complications were compared. RESULT: The mean age was 60.03 + 7.60 (range 42 to 70 years), with male to female ratio of 4:1 and left to right ratio of approximately 1:1. The mean follow up in the series was 16.2 months (range 13 to 36 months). Mean duration of surgery, mean intra-operative blood loss, and mean number of exposures in group A (PFN alone) were 64.88 + 12.24 min (48 to 88), 93 + 1.18 ml (60 to 120), and 32.13 (24 to 46) and in group B (PFN with TBP plate) were 91.86 + 12.78 min (70 to 122 min), 144.8 + 3.6 ml (116 to 208 ml), and 56.6 (38 to 112), respectively. Twenty-five patients and 28 patients in groups A and B respectively achieved score of 4 Chang quality reduction. Mean union time was 13.4 weeks in group A whereas in group B was 11.6 weeks. Mean HHS score in group A was 87.86 with 90% patients in comparison to 94.13 and 97% cases having excellent to good results in group B. In group A, 24 patients, while 29 patients in group B, had excellent to good results. Four patients had hip pain, four had impingement of screws, two had screw migration, three had Z/reverse effect, and four patients had shortening of more than 1 cm in group A. In group B, only one patient had impingement and none of the patient had hip pain, infection, implant failure, Z effect, or shortening. CONCLUSION: The lateral trochanteric wall in IT fractures is significantly important, and when the lateral wall is broken, it can lead to poor results. TBP plate which is applied laterally on femur along with nail and fixing the plate with hip screw and antirotational screw provides faster union, early weight bearing, better reduction, and so better hip functions. TBP can be used successfully to augment, fix, or buttress the lateral trochanteric wall giving excellent to good results but at the cost of surgical time, blood loss, and radiation exposure.