Clinical use of donor-derived cell-free DNA in kidney transplantation

Traditional monitoring of kidney transplant recipients for allograft dysfunction caused by rejection involves serial checks of serum creatinine with biopsy of the renal allograft if dysfunction is suspected.This approach is labor-intensive,invasive and costly.In addition,because this approach relies on a rise in serum creatinine above historical baselines,injury to the allograft can be extensive before this rise occurs.In an effort to address this,donor-derived cell-free DNA(dd-cf DNA)is being used with increasing frequency in the clinical setting as a means of diagnosing a rejection of the renal allograft early in the course.This can poten-tially allow for early intervention to minimize not only injury,but the intensity of antirejection therapy needed and the avoidance of side effects.Here,we will review the available methodology for the determination and quantification of dd-cf DNA,the data supporting its use in clinical practice and the limitations of this technology.

Clinical Communication, Cancer Patients &Considerations to Minimize the Challenges

Clinical communication is a multidimensional concept, which encompasses the core of effective clinical practice. Communication in cancer patients is particularly challenging and yet a less focused area in cancer care. Various barriers and challenges in communication may affect the management protocol of cancer patients. Challenges may arise in various dimensions of cancer care including breaking bad news to delivery of complex clinical information, determination of appropriate treatment strategies, dealing with uncertainties, end of life counseling as well as cultural and language barriers affecting the whole communication dynamics. Effective communication is the basic foundation for responsive treatment decisions, positive health outcome, patient driven compliance and overall high quality of care. Thus, there is a need for acknowledging and actively deciphering the challenges and developing and promoting various protocols of effective communication skills in cancer patients.

A Critical Evaluation of the Role of Routine Uses of Statin as a Tool for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases

Use of Statin is a cornerstone in modern day medical practice and an essential component for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Various evidences exemplify and resonate the importance of Statins in reducing CVD mortality and improvement of survivability. However, there is a continental variation in recent guidelines directing lipid-lowering therapy in regards to aim, dose, timing as well as the protocol for initiation of therapy. Similar uncertainties exist with regards to the generalizability of the finding from available evidence, a variation of benefits of Statin with respect to age and gender, the validity of the research conducted and actual gain in survivability and mortality benefits. Thus, there is a need for looking at the actual indications, risk-benefit ratios and cost effectiveness before tediously prescribing Statin for the primary prevention of CVDs. This paper will attempt to critically review the evidence behind the uses of Statins in the primary prevention of CVDs.

NYHA Class II or III Heart Failure: Who Will Need an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD)?

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is one of the most debilitating and life-threatening complications of heart failure (HF) which has challenged medical care for long. Current guidelines suggest the use of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) in primary prevention of SCD in both New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II and class III heart failure. This paper critically evaluated the evidence underlying the guideline recommendation. In contrast to recent guidelines, the majority of the intervention trials conducted on the topic till date found a promising role of ICD only in the prevention of SCD in NYHA class II HF. One of the trials which found a significant role of ICD in type III heart failure was underpowered. Thus, further trials are needed to validate the use of ICD in the prevention of SCD in type III HF.

PCI in Post Thrombolysis Stable STEMI Patients: A Timeline in Question

ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) occupies a significant portion of the cardiovascular disease spectrum and poses a continuing challenge on the health care delivery system worldwide. A dilemma exists in the clinical triage system for appropriate strategic modalities of treatment, based on underlying triad of patient-hospital-cardiac pathological factors as well as cut off timelines. Current European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guideline recommends percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 3 to 24 hours in post thrombolysis stable patients. This review critically evaluated the evidences underlying the ESC recommendation. Trials included in this review are SIAM III, GRACIA 1, CAPITAL-AMI, CARESS-IN-AMI, NORDISTEMI, PRAGUE-1, WEST and LEIPZIG. Most of the evidences support the notion for immediate post thrombolysis PCI in stable patients within 1.9 to 2.7 hours, which contradicts the ESC timeline of up to 24 hours. Also, there is a reduced generalizability of the trial results due to differences in the design of the various trials, study population, composite endpoints, variations in drug dose & formulation, co-administration of pharmacotherapies and type of stents used. This warrants further research for standardization & optimization of the treatment protocol with respect to post thrombolysis PCI in stable STEMI patients.

Routine Primary PCI;Whether and When Necessary for the Management of NSTEMI—An Evidence Based Evaluation

Non ST elevated myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) accounts for a significant portion of the hospitalizations due to acute coronary syndromes worldwide and is posing a huge challenge towards the health care cost globally. This signifies the need for proper triage and management stratification for the best utilization of the health care resources. Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) with early revascularization is a new emerging invasive technique and application of this technique is increasing tediously among the clinicians. However, the current body of evidences is divided between the efficacy, need and critical timing of PCI compared to conservative management in the treatment protocol for NSTEMI. A review of trials done comparing the early use of PCI versus conservative management indicates inconsistent finding with strong evidence towards early use of PCI in moderate to high-risk NSTEMI patients.