Overview of coronary heart disease risk initiatives in South Asia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is now the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Industrialization and economic growth have led to an unprecedented increment in the burden of CVD and their risk factors in less industrialized regions of the world. While there are abundant data on CVD and their risk factors from longitudinal cohort studies done in the West, good-quality data from South Asia are lacking. RECENT FINDINGS: Several multi-institutional, observational, prospective registries, and epidemiologic cohorts in South Asia have been established to systematically evaluate the burden of CVD and their risk factors. The PINNACLE (Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence) India Quality Improvement Program (PIQIP), the Kerala Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS), and Trivandrum Heart Failure registries have focused on secondary prevention of CVD and performance measurement in both outpatient and inpatient settings, respectively. The Prospective Urban and Rural Epidemiology (PURE), Centre for Cardiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS), and other epidemiologic and genetic studies have focused on primary prevention of CVD and evaluated variables such as environment, smoking, physical activity, health systems, food and nutrition policy, dietary consumption patterns, socioeconomic factors, and healthy neighborhoods. The international cardiovascular community has been responsive to a burgeoning cardiovascular disease burden in South Asia. Several collaborations have formed between the West (North America in particular) and South Asia to catalyze evidence-based and data-driven changes in the federal health policy in this part of the world to promote cardiovascular health and mitigate cardiovascular risk

Radial versus femoral access is associated with reduced complications and mortality in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: an observational cohort study of 10,095 patients

Background— Compared with transfemoral access, transradial access (TRA) for percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with reduced risk of bleeding and vascular complications. Studies suggest that TRA may reduce mortality in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. However, there are few data on the effect of TRA on mortality, specifically, in patients with non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods and Results— We analyzed 10 095 consecutive patients with non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention between 2005 and 2011 in all 8 tertiary cardiac centers in London, United Kingdom. TRA was a predictor for reduced bleeding (odds ratio=0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08–0.57; P =0.002), access-site complications (odds ratio=0.47; 95% CI: 0.23–0.95; P =0.034), and 1-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR]=0.72; 95% CI: 0.54–0.94; P =0.017). Between 2005 and 2007, TRA did not appear to reduce mortality at 1 year (HR=0.81; 95% CI: 0.51–1.28; P =0.376), whereas between 2008 and 2011, TRA conferred survival benefit at 1 year (HR=0.65; 95% CI: 0.46–0.92; P =0.015). The mortality benefit with TRA at 1 year was not seen at the low-volume centers (HR=0.80; 95% CI: 0.47–1.38; P =0.428) but specifically seen in the high volume radial centers (HR=0.70; 95% CI: 0.51–0.97; P =0.031). In propensity-matched analyses, TRA remained a predictor for survival at 1 year (HR=0.60; 95% CI: 0.42–0.85; P =0.005). Instrumental variable analysis demonstrated that TRA conferred mortality benefit at 1-year with an absolute mortality reduction of 5.8% ( P =0.039). Conclusions— In this analysis of patients with non–ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction, TRA appears to be a predictor for survival. Furthermore, the evolving learning curve, experience, and expertise may be important factors contributing to the prognostic benefit conferred with TRA. </jats:sec