Diagnosing Musharraf

Aamir Qureshi—AFP

A heart surgeon weighs in on Musharraf’s ticker trouble.

[dropcap]P[/dropcap]ervez Musharraf remains hospitalized at the Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology in Rawalpindi. Pakistan’s former president and Army chief has been there since Jan. 2, when he developed heart trouble en route to a special court that is to indict him for the treason of sacking some 60 judges in November 2007. Musharraf’s detour set off a news storm—with contentious political, legal, moral, and ethical issues being furiously debated—that has yet to subside.

Did Musharraf require hospitalization? According to news reports, Musharraf had to be rushed to AFIC after he developed a severe and persistent chest pain that traveled to his arm, began to sweat and feel sick. Such complaints in a 70-year-old are extremely suggestive of serious heart problems and a possible heart attack. If this description of how he felt is correct, immediate hospitalization was the right call.

In classical medical terminology, such complaints were referred to as “unstable angina pectoris” but are now included in the spectrum of “acute coronary syndrome.” At AFIC, Musharraf was admitted to a coronary-care unit and received medications to stabilize his condition. Basic tests were then done. We do not have any details of these initial tests, but we do know that these excluded the possibility of an actual acute myocardial infarction or heart attack.

Subsequent diagnostic tests were also performed. Again, we do not have any details of what tests were done, but based on the reports submitted to the court, one thing is clear: besides having general problems that many people his age have, the important finding was that he has considerable calcium deposits in the arteries of his heart.

It would seem that the one important heart test Musharraf did go through at AFIC was a CT angiogram. This is primarily an advanced x-ray that besides providing a picture of the heart arteries also yields an assessment of the amount of calcium deposited in them. The higher the calcium score, the greater are the chances of having severe blockages of the arteries.

Many of us remember that during one of his visits to the U.S., then-president Musharraf made a mysterious side trip to middle-of-nowhere Paris, Texas, where Pakistani-American cardiologist Dr. Arjumand Hashmi runs a sophisticated cardiac center. It is possible but not confirmed that at that time Musharraf at least underwent a CT angiogram. When Dr. Hashmi now states that Musharraf has serious blockages in his heart arteries, he is probably comparing the calcium scoring done at his facility many years ago with the latest AFIC results.

Based on what is known, it would appear that Musharraf does indeed have considerable blockages of his heart arteries. The extent of these blockages is, however, being debated by people who don’t know the difference between a heart artery and a vein in the heart.

The latest question being raised by these armchair heart specialists is the question of an angiography. They claim Musharraf has refused to have an angiography. As someone who has seen thousands of angiography test results over my professional lifetime, and operated on a few thousand patients based on these results, I am entirely amused by this sudden expertise developed by media personalities and lawyers who have no idea what this test is all about.

Coronary angiography is a specialized test that requires the passage of a catheter or small plastic tube through the artery in the leg or the arm into a heart artery so that a special medicine can be injected and x-ray pictures can be taken to outline artery blockages. This is an invasive procedure. And like all invasive procedures it can only be performed if the patient agrees to go through with it. Medical ethics hold that it is entirely Musharraf’s right to refuse such a procedure. (Frankly, looking at the chief prosecutor in this case, my suggestion to Musharraf as a heart doctor would be to have a coronary angiogram done as soon as possible.)

AFIC is a pretty good place to take care of the problem of heart artery blockages. But, again, it is the patient’s sole right whether he wishes to seek further care from Ajmer Sharif or Paris, Texas. If a Pakistani court or a government official denies a patient that right and there happens to be an unfortunate outcome, will that court or government official then responsible be willing to accept the charge of being accessory to homicide?

Many pundits and politicians are of the opinion that Musharraf is lying, that he was never sick and sought refuge at the Army-run AFIC to avoid indictment. As far as the lying part goes, even the interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan has said that Musharraf’s health scare was genuine. Musharraf’s choice to opt for an Army hospital appears fairly obvious and far from sensational: as a former soldier, he obviously felt more comfortable being treated in an Army facility. After Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan fell off a forklift last year and required hospitalization for spine fractures, he ended up not in an orthopedic hospital but at his own hospital—a cancer hospital. This was because Khan was sure he would get the best possible care there. Patients prefer hospitals where they know the doctors involved and can expect good care, so it is entirely appropriate that Musharraf went to an Army hospital.

There is also a lot of reactive nonsense about Musharraf’s wanting to seek treatment abroad when there is “quality” medical care available in the country. Both Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif are known to visit London every so often for “routine” medical checkups. Since politicians don’t want people to know they are sick, there’s been no disclosure about the medical details of these checkups. And, of course, we all remember when Asif Ali Zardari as president developed neurological problems thought to be heart trouble and ended up in Dubai for diagnosis and treatment. There’s also the security issue. The chances of successful treatment and survival of Patient Musharraf, Al Qaeda and the Taliban’s most-wanted man, are far brighter abroad.

Hussain is a cardiac surgeon and editor-at-large of Newsweek Pakistan. From our Feb. 8, 2014, issue.

View Comments (24)

  • Maybe Musharraf is sick. Maybe he needs angiography. And a patient has a right to have his treatment anywhere he wants. But, what if the patient is the sole accused in a High Treason case? And just as the good Doctor is allergic to being dictated by lawyers, I being a lawyer am highly allergic to being dictated by doctors trying to be a lawyer! The truth is that medical facilities to the accused under arrest are granted by the State. No doubt best medical services should be provided but that can only happen with the jurisdiction of the prosecuting authority; in this case a special Court. No where in the world an accused under arrest is provided this dream treatment where the accused can choose the venue of his treatment anywhere in the world. There is a lesson to be learned here; Lawyers should not try to become doctors and the doctors should not reciprocate!

    • This is a congroo court, already had decided that Mushraf had committed the crime before the trial. What kind of justice is this? Singling out one man, you currupt people, where is justice in Pakistan? Criminals get free for money. He is accused but not arrested dear and might get arrested before the trial. Shame on this justice.

    • Patient's right come before any other right .. This is practiced all over the world .. Unfortunately the lawyers and courts are based to the hilt to accept that

  • Unlike Musharraf, Zardari, Nawaz and Shahbaz are not evading a treason trial indictment. While a free man has all rights to decide where he wants to be treated an accused in treason trial does. If Musharraf is allowed this right then all other criminals should be allowed to proceed abroad if they want medical treatment there to evade punishment

    • He is a free man .. He is not indigted nor is he under arrest .. and nawaz asked for permission to go to England for hair transplant when he was in Saudi. . And zardari gave medical certificate of dementia to avoid courts

  • Unfortunately we have very short memory, Nusrat Bhutto was under arrest when she was allowed to go abroad for the treatment of her so called throat cancer, she lived many years after that, even Asif Zardari enjoyed treatment at Newyork hospitals while a prisoner. Musharraf is still a free man and it his right to choose the hospital/doctors of his choice.

  • I thought good doctors do not diagnose based on opinions. I am shocked to see the authority enforced in the conclusions while admitting the he knows nothing about the conditions or reports. :)

  • If they such doubts, why not just get a second opinion on him? Medical reports of any individual are supposed to be confidential, however our 'great' media proudly displayed his reports online, one even uploaded it to scribd. Now, as the reoports are available, why not just seek opinion from some other renowned cardio sepcialist FORMALLY (not the way media have been doing by asking evety Tommy, Dicky and Hamesh during news hours).

  • How about we invite specialist in Pk to treat him. Musharraf is a chronic liar and his attitude towards courts doesnot earn him any sympathies.

  • The special court and judges are chosen and appointed by a partisan Prime Minister and Chief Justice who have personal grudges; the CJ has himself dismissed judges. One of the judges is not even qualified for the post! In fact an expert says that even Musharraf's team of lawyers do not have to attend the sessions of this illegally chosen kangaroo court! The prosecutor says that he has taken on the case so that in the future there will be no dictator in this democracy; his emoluments are a pittance. How come he flew with 100 kilos free baggage against all rules?
    Firstly, Musharraf was in a plane mid-air when the army stepped in to save the plane from crashing with the COAS and almost 100 school children, Is that treason or treachery or permitted by the law of the land?
    Secondly, Musharraf did not contravene the 'abeyance' stipulation which was not even a clause or section of Article 6, when the supposedly enormous crime was committed. According to the Constitution the sanctity and security of a country is more important than the Constitution. Pray of what use is a Constitution if the country's administration is paralyzed by the CJ's interference and is within days of being declared a 'failed; state?

  • Musharraf is taking the coward's way out ! If he has a serious heart problem ,he should waste no time in getting the proper treatment ASAP. Pakistani doctors and hospitals are as good as any abroad ,especially the AFIC ! He just wants to run away with his tail between his legs ...........