Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘cto’

Coronary collateral circulation is the most poorly understood, and often neglected concept among the cardiology community.There is a general perception , in obstructive CAD ,  coronary collaterals are an inferior modality of  back up blood supply than artificial collateral (Also called CABG ) ! One of the reasons,  it is   been ridiculed by many  mainstream cardiologists is   because  , it comes by nature , and also free of cost !

The often quoted statement* ,collateral blood flow can not sustain blood flow during exercise ,  is not based on solid scientific data. In the real world , there are thousands of patients actively pursuing life with chronic total occlusion and good collaterals.

It is surprising , there is no  physiologically valid ,  controlled study available to compare CABG with natural collaterals

*When repeatedly told , a  statement becomes a fact !

It can be assumed (Unscientifically ofcourse ! )   the  remarkable  success  of medical therapy  in COURAGE  and the OAT * study  can be attributable to the naturally occurring coronary collateral circulation.

* Summary of COURAGE & OAT : A   block  in the coronary artery  need not be opened  to prolong human survival !

You draw your own conclusions from the  following case study

A 40 year old women , with stable angina and good physical activity

Her angiogram shows.

coronary-collateral-2

RCA injection

coronary-collateral

Read Full Post »

All is not well,  that ends well !

                                       Treatment guidelines in cardiology  practice  are periodically published by ACC/AHA/ESC.These guidelines  represent the current scientific practice. They are called some times as recommendations. Medical professionals tend to adhere to this guidelines whenever possible.They are not legally binding in most of the countries.In USA some states believe it, to be legally binding.

 

The problem with these guidelines  are , they are classified as class 1 ,class 2 , class 3 recommendations.

 

Class 1, A  drug , device  or a procedure  Is definitely useful and must be prescribed.

Class 3,   A  drug , device  or a procedure  Is not useful and should not be used .

Class 2*, A  drug , device  or a procedure  may be useful  or may be harmful , and hence may be used or may not be used . (Vaguest possible guideline!)

 *Altered to convey the meaning

What are the  guideline violations that can be sued in court of law  ?

A person with established  CAD who is not been prescribed a  statin (Cholesterol lowering drug)  can be sued straight away,  even if the patient has no adverse outcome due to the nonprescription of that drug. The issue here is , the doctor  has not prescribed  a drug which has  proven benefit .The law is clear on that .Most will  agree that,  the  doctor is at fault ,  and he  is never protected  even by their  colleagues .He  can’t defend his action.

What are the medical errors that can never* be sued in court of law !

But the same doctor who opens up a totally occluding coronary artery in an asymptomatic patient(CTO -chronic total occlusion) and lands up  in a complication and the  patient dies. This could be  major guideline violation as opening a CTO in an incidentally detected , asymptomatic patient is a class 3 recommendation. Neither the physician, patient , institution  nor  the regulatory authorities bother about this even though there is strong case for censure , in reality it never happens. Number  of  experts from leading hospitals do this procedure in live work shop all over the world with full media glare, It is an irony the same  experts are only  writing  in their  guidelines  that  these procedures should not be done inappropriately.

And this medical  error ( Should we call it a  crime if it is knowingly done ! )   keeps growing as the physician never feels guilty about it .

The message here is

 A physician of a state of the art hospital,  in a scientifically advanced  country  goes scott free and guilt free  even if he openly violate the scientific guidelines and do a inappropriate procedure that result in a patient death. Mean while a small time physician in a remote place in the same country can be taken to task  for not prescribing a officially  recommended drug (By standard guidelines) .He will be labelled unscientific and unethical even if his non prescription , had not caused any untoward health outcome .

In short , in today’s modern medical practice 

 Even a  ” Minor error of  ommision”   attracts guilt and perceived fear among the physicians. Meanwhile  many  of the ” Major errors of commission”  done by professionals are rarely frowned upon and thus these  mistakes continue to perpetuate !

*There should be a strong provision in medical law to address the issue of inappropriate procedures even if the procedure has not resulted any untoward effect to the patient.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts