Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Low/Moderate-Intensity Statin plus Ezetimibe Combination Therapy vs. High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

AIM: Statin therapy is considered the gold standard for treating hypercholesterolemia. This updated meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of a low/moderate-intensity statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS: A systematic search of two databases (PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL) was conducted from inception to January 2023 and a total of 21 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the analysis. Data were pooled using Hedges's g and a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to derive standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (Cis). The primary outcome studied was the effect of these treatments on lipid parameters and safety events. RESULTS: The results revealed that combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (SMD= - 0.41; CI - 0.63 to - 0.19; P = 0.0002). There was no significant change in the levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), Apo A1, or Apo B. The safety of these treatments was assessed by the following markers alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and creatine phosphokinase (CK), and a significant difference was only observed in CK (SMD: - 0.81; CI - 1.52 to - 0.10; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of low/moderate-intensity statin combination therapy significantly reduced LDL-C levels compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy, making it preferable for patients with related risks. However, further trials are encouraged to evaluate potential adverse effects associated with combined therapy.

Prevalence and Predictors of Readmissions in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy and Atrial Fibrillation/Flutter.

Atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF) is the most common dysrhythmia in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Unexplained left ventricular hypertrophy and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction are integral components of HCM pathology which can cause increased left atrial pressure and atrial myopathy contributing to the substrate for AF. We aimed to determine the impact of AF on hospital readmissions in patients with HCM. We conducted a retrospective analysis using the 2015 to 2019 Nationwide Readmission Database to analyze the effect of AF on 30-day readmission and causes of 30-day readmission in patients with HCM. We also determined the hospital, patient, and procedure-specific independent predictors of readmission in patients with HCM and AF. Of 191,235 index HCM hospitalizations, 81,390 (42.6%) had a secondary diagnosis of AF. A total of 16.9% of patients with HCM and AF were readmitted within 30 days as compared with 14% of HCM patients without AF. The presence of AF was independently associated with a higher risk of all-cause 30-day readmission (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.17 to 1.25, p <0.001). The foremost etiology of 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF was hypertensive heart and chronic kidney disease with heart failure, whereas the foremost etiology of 30-day readmission in HCM patients without AF was sepsis. Interventions aimed toward AF management (electrical cardioversion: adjusted HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.01. p = 0.074, AF ablation: HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13, p = 0.409, Watchman procedure: HR 1.50, 95% CI 0.16 to 14.6, p = 0.725) during index admission did not significantly impact the 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF. Myectomy during index hospitalization (adjusted HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.86, p = 0.010) was most strongly associated with a lower risk of 30-day readmission in HCM patients with AF. In conclusion, in patients hospitalized for HCM, presence of AF was associated with excess risk of 30-day all-cause readmission. Interventions aimed toward HCM management, that is, myectomy rather than interventions aimed toward AF management predicted lower readmission rate in this patient population.

Differential Use of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors with Bivalirudin in Patients with STEMI Undergoing PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIM: The efficacy and safety of bivalirudin when used concurrently with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) is uncertain. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to explore the impact of differential use (greater and balanced) of GPI. METHODS: Online databases were queried from inception to March 2023 to identify eight randomized controlled trials (n = 22,483) for inclusion. The primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and net adverse clinical events (NACE). Secondary efficacy endpoints included cardiac death, reinfarction, stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke. Data were pooled using a random-effects model to derive risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: When compared to heparin, bivalirudin was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.72-0.97; P = 0.02), major bleeding (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.93; P = 0.01), cardiac death (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.66-0.94; P = 0.01), and NACE (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.72-0.89; P < 0.0001). However, while the bivalirudin arm showed an increased likelihood of ST in the greater GPI subgroup (RR 1.70; 95% CI 1.13-2.56; P = 0.01), it was associated with a decreased likelihood of ST in the balanced GPI subgroup (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24-0.65; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings suggest that bivalirudin may be a more efficacious intervention than heparin for reducing certain adverse events in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI.

Comparing the efficacy of corticosteroids among patients with community-acquired pneumonia in the ICU versus non-ICU settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the potential of corticosteroids in treating community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), conflicting evidence exists regarding their effect on mortality. To address this gap and provide new insights, we conducted a pre-specified subgroup meta-analysis of corticosteroid use in CAP patients, focusing on the ICU versus non-ICU subsets. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and SCOPUS from inception to May 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes of interest were mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, need for ICU admission, and treatment failure. Secondary outcomes analysed were the need for hospital readmission, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, secondary infections, and hyperglycaemic events. The results were analysed through the random-effects model. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Eighteen randomized controlled trials (n = 4472) analyzing patients withCAP were included. Our results suggest that corticosteroids significantly reduced the incidence of mortality (RR: 0.66; 95 % CI: 0.54, 0.81; P = <0.0001) and need for mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.44, 0.73; P = <0.00001). It was also observed that corticosteroids significantly decrease the lengths of ICU (MD: -1.67; 95 % CI: -2.97, -0.37; P = 0.01) and hospital stay (MD: -1.94; 95 % CI: -2.89, -0.98; P = 0.0001), while increasing the number of hyperglycemic events (RR: 1.68; 95 % CI: 1.32, 2.12; P = <0.0001) and hospital readmissions (RR: 1.19; 95 % CI: 1.04, 1.37; P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that corticosteroids yield improved outcomes in CAP patients with regard to reduced mortality and the need for mechanical ventilation. It highlights the need for further large-scale RCTs with the proposed, specific stratifications.

Is Using the Harmonic Scalpel Better than Conventional Hemostasis in Neck Dissection? A Meta-Analysis.

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objective: The clinical decision to pursue harmonic scalpel (HS) method vs conventional hemostasis to treat head and neck cancers has been arguably predicated on the clinical outcomes observed. This study aims to evaluate the surgical outcomes of neck dissection between both techniques and perform an updated meta-analysis using the available literature. Methods: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library through 31st December 2021, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Outcome metrics included operative time and intraoperative blood loss. Secondary outcomes consisted of length of hospital stay, length of drain stay, total drain output, and postoperative complications. A meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager Version 5.3 (RevMan) software employing the Random Effects Model. Results: We identified 114 articles, out of which 10 randomized control trials (RCTs) analyzing a combined total of 558 patients met the inclusion criteria after title and full-text screening. Meta-analysis shows the group treated with HS had a significantly shorter operative time. [MD = -23.21, 95% CI (-34.30, -12.12) P value <.0001 I2 = 92%] but an insignificant lesser intraoperative blood loss [MD = -61.53, 95% CI (-88.61, -34.45) P < .00001 I2 = 79%]. Conclusions: This study confirms that that HS use in neck dissection yields a reduced operative time and intra operative blood loss relative to conventional hemostasis. Furthermore, our paper shows no superiority of HS method over conventional hemostasis where length of hospital stays, length of drain stays, and postoperative complications are concerned. Future RCTs with high-level evidence may further elucidate the relative effectiveness of HS method over conventional hemostasis in treating head and neck cancers.

Safety and efficacy of antithrombotics in outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a global health emergency, with well over six hundred million infections and over six million deaths to date. Besides other ramifications, it is also associated with inflammation and an augmented risk of thromboembolic complications. Despite this, the risks and benefits of antithrombotic drugs in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 have not been well-established and remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic drugs on mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 patients by performing an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We queried electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Embase) from their inception up to September 2022 for randomized controlled trials comparing antithrombotic drugs against placebo. The outcomes of interest were the need for hospital care, mortality, and thromboembolic events in the enrolled participants. Dichotomous outcomes were presented as risk ratio (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) and were consolidated using random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Five eligible studies (Rivaroxaban/Apixaban, two; enoxaparin, two; Sulodexide, one), consisting of 2,005 participants with mild to moderate COVID-19, were included. Pooled results show that antithrombotics, when compared to placebo, do not significantly reduce all-cause mortality (RR 0.51, 95 % CI 0.15-1.68; P = 0.27; I2 = 0), thromboembolic events (RR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.17-3.51; P = 0.74; I2 = 0), need for hospitalization (RR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.51-1.03; P = 0.08; I2 = 0), nor significantly increase clinically relevant non-major bleeding events (RR 2.36, 95 % CI 0.56-9.89; P = 0.24; I2 = 0). However, when Sulodexide was compared independently to other antithrombotics, it significantly reduced the need for hospitalization (RR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.37-0.95; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Our pooled analysis was not able to establish statistically significant benefits or risks of using antithrombotic drugs in mild to moderate COVID-19 patients. To further improve our understanding of the efficacy, safety and risk profile of such a therapy, large sample randomized clinical trials are required on a wide scale.

Heart Failure Remote Monitoring: A Review and Implementation How-To.

Heart failure (HF) is a significant clinical and financial burden worldwide. Remote monitoring (RM) devices capable of identifying early physiologic changes in decompensation have the potential to reduce the HF burden. However, few trials have discussed at length the practical aspects of implementing RM in real-world clinical practice. The present paper reviews current RM devices and clinical trials, focusing on patient populations, outcomes, data collection, storage, and management, and describes the implementation of an RM device in clinical practice, providing a pragmatic and adaptable framework.

Efficacy and safety of mavacamten in treatment of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aim: This meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of mavacamten in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Methods & materials: A search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus up to August 2022 for randomized studies reporting our pre-specified outcomes. Results: It was observed that mavacamten significantly improved New York Heart Association class (p < 0.009), Clinical Summary Score of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (p = 0.02), post-exercise left ventricular outflow tract gradient (p < 0.00001), functional end point (p = 0.05), and lowered septal reduction therapy rates (p < 0.00001). However, there were no significant differences in the ≥1 severe adverse events, ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse events, left ventricular volume index, left ventricular filling pressure, left ventricular end-diastolic volume index, and peak oxygen uptake (pVO2). Conclusion: Future large-scale trials are required to confirm our results and determine the long-term benefits and risks of mavacamten use in these patients.

Mavacamten is a recently introduced medication that relaxes the heart muscle and is indicated for patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (a disease in which parts of the heart become thick and stiff). To determine the effectiveness and safety of this drug, the results of clinical trials were combined in order to produce an overall estimate. Overall, it was observed that mavacamten improved most functional parameters related to the heart and demonstrated no significant increases in the number of side effects. This suggests the effectiveness and safety of mavacamten, although further trials are needed to confirm our results.

Is endovascular treatment alone as effective and safe as that with preceding intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of direct endovascular therapy (EVT) and bridging therapy (EVT with preceding intravenous thrombolysis i.e. IVT), in acute anterior circulation, large vessel occlusion stroke. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature review of the English language literature was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, SCOPUS and ClinicalTrials.gov. Outcomes of interest were measured by the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and included: no disability (mRS0), no significant disability despite some symptoms (mRS1), slight disability (mRS2), moderate disability (mRS3), moderately severe disability (mRS4), severe disability (mRS5), mortality (mRS6). Additionally, we inspected patients having excellent outcome, functional independence outcome, and poor outcome, along with successful reperfusion and intracranial hemorrhage. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of seven RCTs involving 2,392 patients were finally included. The chances of achieving successful reperfusion were significantly more with IVT+EVT as compared to EVT alone (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.00; P=0.03) (I2=0%). There was no significant difference in the number of patients having outcomes ranging from mRS0 to mRS6, excellent outcome, functional independence, poor outcome or incidence of intracranial hemorrhage, who underwent either EVT alone or IVT+EVT. CONCLUSIONS: Additional trials are needed to determine if the absence of significant differences is due to insufficient sample size or if the combination therapy is truly not beneficial.

Effect of vitamin D on postoperative atrial fibrillation in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D insufficiency/deficiency has been identified as a risk factor for postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This is associated with significantly increased morbidity and mortality leading to not only prolonged hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, but increased risk of stroke, heart failure, dementia, and long-term atrial fibrillation. This analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in preventing POAF in patients undergoing CABG. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and SCOPUS from inception to June 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The outcome of interest was the incidence of POAF. Secondarily, we analyzed the length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, cardiac arrest, cardiac tamponade, and blood transfusion. Results were pooled using a random-effect model. Three RCTs consisting of 448 patients were included. RESULTS: Our results suggest that vitamin D significantly reduced the incidence of POAF (RR: 0.60; 95 % CI: 0.40, 0.90; p = 0.01; I2 = 8 %). It was also observed that vitamin D significantly reduced the duration of ICU stay (WMD: -1.639; 95 % CI: -1.857, -1.420; p < 0.00001). Furthermore, the length of hospital stay (WMD: -0.85; 95 % CI: -2.14, 0.43; p = 0.19; I2 = 87 %) was also reduced, however, the result was not significant. CONCLUSION: Our pooled analysis suggests that vitamin D prevents POAF. Future large-scale randomized trials are needed to confirm our results.

Comparison of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and thiazolidinediones for management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The pharmacologic treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) remains unclear. METHODS: Two reviewers searched PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane Central and clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with NAFLD with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving TZDs vs SGLT2 inhibitors. The primary outcomes were change in alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and improvement in steatosis and fibrosis. The secondary outcomes were changes in lipid profile, body weight and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Random effects models with continuous outcomes as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used. RESULTS: Five studies (n = 311 NAFLD patients) were included. Patients treated with SGLT2 inhibitors (n = 156) showed significant decrease in visceral fat area (VFA; WMD 23.45, p < 0.00001) and body weight (WMD 4.22, p < 0.00001) as compared to those treated with TZDs (n = 155). Patients from both groups showed improvement in AST (WMD 1.21, p = 0.40), ALT (WMD -0.46, p = 0.81), GGT (WMD -0.47, p = 0.84), hepatic fibrosis (WMD 0.11, p = 0.52), LDL (WMD 2.19, p = 0.35), HbA1c (WMD -0.16%, p = 0.20), HOMA-IR (WMD: -0.04, p = 0.91) and FPG (WMD -7.37, p = 0.28) which was equivalent and non-significant. CONCLUSION: The improvement in liver enzymes, steatosis and fibrosis caused by SGLT2 inhibitors and TZDs was similar. SGLT2 inhibitors, however, resulted in a significant decrease in VFA and body weight. As weight loss is found to have a positive effect on the resolution of steatosis and fibrosis in NAFLD patients, SGLT2 inhibitors may have the potential to be considered for long-term management, however, further research needs to be conducted to determine the utility of SGLT2 inhibitor class of antidiabetic drugs for effectively treating NAFLD.

Is it safe and effective to administer COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women performing an updated meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central, and SCOPUS from inception to March 2022. Outcomes of interest were incidence of adverse maternal, fetal and neonatal consequences pertaining to safety of the vaccines. Secondarily, we analyzed the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalization for COVID-19, and admission to the I.C.U. for COVID-19 assessing the effectiveness of vaccines. Results were pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS: Ten observational studies (n=326,499) analyzing pregnant women were included. Our results suggest that COVID-19 vaccination prevents infection (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.67; P = <0.00001) and related hospitalizations (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.82; P = 0.006) effectively. It was also observed that vaccination does not change adverse outcomes in pregnancy, namely preeclampsia or eclampsia, stroke (four weeks of delivery), meconium-stained amniotic fluid, spontaneous vaginal delivery, operative vaginal delivery, cesarean delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and blood transfusions. Furthermore, the vaccine was observed to be protective against neonatal COVID-19 I.C.U. admissions (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.81, 0.90; P = <0.00001). CONCLUSION: Our pooled analysis suggests that the COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women prevents infection effectively and has no adverse outcomes. Future large-scale trials in a randomized fashion are needed to confirm our results.

Transaxillary Versus Transaortic Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in the Treatment of Aortic Stenosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a technique that can be performed through multiple approaches, and the benefits of one approach over another are still being evaluated to make sure patients receive the best possible care. Our meta-analysis aims to compare clinical and procedural outcomes of the transaxillary (TAx) and transaortic (TAo) approaches to validate the more optimal procedure. The systematic literature search was done via PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central databases from inception to December 2021, to identify articles reporting data on both TAx TAVR and TAo TAVR. In addition, we checked ClinicalTrials.gov for more published or unpublished trials. Baseline patient characteristics, procedure results, and clinical results were extracted from the article and pooled for analysis. A quantitative meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 (Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). The outcomes extracted included blood transfusion, conversion to sternotomy, tamponade, contrast amount, procedure time, bleeding incidents (minor, major, or life-threatening), length of stay (LOS), vascular complications (minor or major), acute kidney injury (AKI), paravalvular leak (PVL), permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, 30-day mortality, one-year mortality, 30-day stroke, and device success. The final analysis included 11 articles, consisting of 10 observational studies and a pivotal trial. Cumulative results revealed that the TAo approach had a significantly lower incidence of vascular complications (RR = 2.30; 95% CI = 1.22 to 4.35), and the need for implantation of a permanent pacemaker (RR = 1.82; 95% CI = 1.30 to 2.54) along with a lower amount of contrast (mean difference (MD) = 27.40; 95% CI = 3.73 to 51.08) needed to be used. The TAx group was associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality (RR = 0.46; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.69), AKI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.67), and length of hospital stay (MD = -1.95; 95% CI = -2.51 to -1.38). No significant difference was observed between the outcomes of 30-day stroke (RR = 1.38; 95% CI = 0.81 to 2.33), PVL (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.50 to 2.18), tamponade (RR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.12 to 4.03), conversion to sternotomy (RR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.06 to 4.30), device success (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.07), the incidence of bleeding (RR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.51 to 1.10), and procedure time (MD = 4.44; 95% CI = -96.30 to 105.17). Both the procedures were associated with their benefits and risks. Although most of the outcomes favored TAx transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), it is too early to say if it would be better than TAo TAVI. To authenticate the findings concluded in this meta-analysis and further improve our understanding of the efficacy, safety, and risk profile between TAx and TAo approaches for TAVI, large sample randomized clinical trials are required on a wide scale.

Prevalence of Rheumatic Diseases in a Tertiary Care Hospital of Karachi.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatic diseases are referred to as conditions affecting joints, muscles, ligaments, tendons, and bones. According to a report by World Health Organization, rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases were labeled as the second most reported cause of disability around the globe. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of rheumatic diseases in a tertiary care hospital of Karachi; additionally, associations with age groups, gender and comorbidities were obtained as well. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Orthopedic Out Patient Department (OPD) of Dr. Ruth KM Pfau Civil Hospital, Karachi over a span of three months in 2018 (February till May). All 346 patients were follow-up diagnosed cases in the age range of 11-90 years, divided into groups of adolescents, young adults, adults, and older adults. The subjects were questioned about their symptoms, duration of illness, presence of comorbidities, genetic background and the therapy they are undergoing along with compliance. Simple statistical analysis of frequency was done, whereas chi-square test was applied to study associations with gender, age groups, and comorbidities. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 2000 patients visited the orthopedic OPD, 346 of which were diagnosed cases of rheumatic diseases, yielding a prevalence of 17.3%. The mean age of rheumatic patients who partook in the study was 46.15 ± 15.49 (Range: 12 - 84). Osteoarthritis was recorded as the most prevalent condition, followed by non-specific low back pain and rheumatoid arthritis. Osteoarthritis was statistically significant in young adults, adults, and older adults, while non-specific low back pain had significant associations with gender, young adults, and adults. Diabetes was significantly associated with osteoarthritis, non-specific low back pain, shoulder pain syndrome and psoriatic arthritis, while hypertension significantly co-existed with systemic lupus erthematosus. CONCLUSION: Rheumatic diseases constitute a major disease burden in almost all of the age groups, especially in young patients (18-40 years) within our setup.