METHODS: A retrospective analysis of dengue patients admitted to a tertiary care teaching hospital during the period of six years (2008 - 2013) was performed. Patient's demographics, clinical and laboratory findings were recorded via structured data collection form. Patients were categorized into dengue fever (DF) and dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF). Appropriate statistical methods were used to compare these two groups in order to determine difference in clinico-laboratory characteristics and to identify independent risk factors of DHF.
RESULTS: A total 667 dengue patients (30.69 ± 16.13 years; Male: 56.7 %) were reviewed. Typical manifestations of dengue like fever, myalgia, arthralgia, headache, vomiting, abdominal pain and skin rash were observed in more than 40 % patients. DHF was observed in 79 (11.8 %) cases. Skin rash, dehydration, shortness of breath, pleural effusion and thick gall bladder were more significantly (P 40 years (OR: 4.1, P
METHODS: All MI patients admitted to the emergency department of Faisalabad Institute of Cardiology from April, 2016 to March, 2017 were recruited into the study. The clinico-laboratory profile and in-hospital outcomes of patients with and without DM were compared using chi-squared test or student t-test, where appropriate.
RESULTS: A total 4063 patients (Mean age: 55.86 ± 12.37years) with male preponderance were included into the study. STEMI was most prevalent (n = 2723, 67%) type of MI among study participants. DM was present in substantial number of cases (n = 3688, 90.8%). Patients with DM presented with increased BMI, higher blood pressure, elevated levels of cholesterol, serum creatinine, and blood urea nitrogen, when compared to the patients without DM (p<0.05). Out of 560 patients who were followed up, cardiogenic shock was frequent (n = 293, 52.3%) adverse outcome followed by heart failure (n = 114, 20.4%), atrial fibrillation (n = 78, 13.9%) and stroke (n = 75, 13.4 %). Moreover, in-hospital adverse outcomes were more prevalent among MI patients with DM than those without DM.
CONCLUSIONS: MI patients with DM present with varying clinico laboratory characteristics as well as experience higher prevalence of adverse cardiovascular events as compared to patients without DM. These patients require individual management strategy on very first day of admission.
METHODOLOGY: A prospective observational study was conducted by inviting pre-dialysis CKD patients. Fluid overload was assessed by BIS.
RESULTS: A total of 312 CKD patients with mean eGFR 24.5 ± 11.2 ml/min/1.73 m2were enrolled. Based on OH value ≥7 %, 135 (43.3 %) patients were hypervolemic while euvolemia was observed in 177 (56.7 %) patients. Patients were categorized in different regions of hydration reference plot (HRP) generated by BIS i.e., 5.1 % in region-N (normal BP and fluid status), 20.5 % in region I (hypertensive with severe fluid overload), 29.5 % in region I-II (hypertensive with mild fluid overload), 22 % in region II (hypertensive with normohydration), 10.2 % in region III (underhydration with normal/low BP) and 12.5 % in region IV (normal BP with severe fluid overload). A total of 144 (46 %) patients received diuretics on basis of physician assessment of BP and edema. Maximum diuretics 100 (69.4 %) were prescribed in patients belonging to regions I and I-II of HRP. Interestingly, a similar number of diuretic prescriptions were observed in region II (13 %) and region IV (12 %). Surprisingly, 7 (4.9 %) of patients in region III who were neither hypervolemic nor hypertensive were also prescribed with diuretics.
CONCLUSION: BIS can aid clinicians to categorize CKD patients on basis of their fluid status and provide individualized pharmacotherapy to manage hypertensive CKD patients.