No abstract

Aims The prevalence of premature coronary artery disease (CAD) in India is two to three times more than other ethnic groups. Untreated heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is one of the important causes for premature CAD. As the age advances, these patients without treatment have 100 times increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) mortality resulting from myocardial infarction (MI). Recent evidence suggests that one in 250 individuals may be affected by FH (nearly 40 million people globally). It is indicated that the true global prevalence of FH is underestimated. The true prevalence of FH in India remains unknown. Methods A total of 635 patients with premature CAD were assessed for FH using the Dutch Lipid Clinical Network (DLCN) criteria. Based on scores, patients were diagnosed as definite, probable, possible, or no FH. Other CV risk factors known to cause CAD such as smoking, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension were also recorded. Results Of total 635 patients, 25 (4%) were diagnosed as definite, 70 (11%) as probable, 238 (37%) as possible, and 302 (48%) without FH, suggesting the prevalence of potential (definite + probable) FH of about 15% in the North Indian population. FH is more common in younger patients, and they have lesser incidence of common CV risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, and smoking than the younger MI patients without FH (26.32% vs.42.59%; 17.89% vs.29.44%; 22.11% vs.40.74%). Conclusion FH prevalence is high among patients with premature CAD admitted to a cardiac unit. To detect patients with FH, routine screening with simple criteria such as family history of premature CAD combined with hypercholesterolemia, and a DLCN criteria score >5 may be effectively used.

ObjectivePrimary objective was to compare the effects of atorvastatin 40 mg vs 80 mg on LDL-C in Indian patients with atherosclerotic dyslipidemia. Secondary objectives were to compare the effects of atorvastatin 40 mg vs 80 mg on HDL-C and triglycerides and also comparing of side effects (myopathy, hepatotoxicity and new onset diabetes mellitus) of both doses.MethodThis Study is A Prospective, randomized, open-label, comparative study. This study was conducted on 240 patients of dyslipidemia (as per ACC/AHA 2013 lipid guidelines) attending the OPD/wards/CCU of department of cardiology, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. They were randomly divided into 2 groups of 120 each. Group A consisted patients who received Atorvastatin 40 mg daily and Group B Atorvastatin 80 mg daily. The follow up period was 6 months.ResultsAt 3 and 6 month follow up, Atorvastatin 40 mg leads to mean LDL cholesterol reduction of 47.18 ± 20.81 & 50.03 ± 18.06 respectively. While Atorvastatin 80 mg results in LDL reduction as 50.11 ± 15.85 & 52.30 ± 13.72. The comparison between two doses revealed a non-significant difference (p = .118 & p = .149 respectively).At 6 months of follow up, few patients reported myalgia (2 in group A and 7 in Group B). The difference between groups was significant (p = .045). Although none of our patient had significant elevation of CPK.ConclusionThis study concluded that both doses of atorvastatin (40 & 80 mg) are equally efficacious in improving dyslipidemia but higher dose leads to more incidence of myalgia.

No abstract

No abstract