You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 301 No. 1, January 7, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Revascularization
 •Cardiovascular System
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Surgery
 •Surgical Interventions
 •Cardiovascular/ Cardiothoracic Surgery
 •Prognosis/ Outcomes
 •Drug Therapy
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Cardiovascular Intervention
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Outcomes in the Era of Bare-Metal Stents vs the Era of Drug-Eluting Stents

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: I have a number of concerns about the study by Dr Malenka and colleagues1 on outcomes following stenting in the bare-metal stent era vs drug-eluting stent era, which concluded that there was a decline in the need for repeat revascularization procedures. First, the authors excluded patients with any percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass within 1 year. These patients were likely to have bare-metal stents since the drug-eluting stent cohort was from the years immediately after these stents were introduced. Thus, some cases with restenosis within a year were likely to have been left out.

Second, the authors did not perform separate analyses for patients receiving bare-metal vs drug-eluting stents even though this information was available based on codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Third, no information was provided about the reasons certain patients received bare-metal vs drug-eluting stents, . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Abhimanyu Beri, MD
abhiberi@gmail.com
Department of Internal Medicine
Michigan State University
East Lansing



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Outcomes Following Coronary Stenting in the Era of Bare-Metal vs the Era of Drug-Eluting Stents
David J. Malenka, Aaron V. Kaplan, F. Lee Lucas, Sandra M. Sharp, and Jonathan S. Skinner
JAMA. 2008;299(24):2868-2876.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Outcomes in the Era of Bare-Metal Stents vs the Era of Drug-Eluting Stents
Jeremy A. Rassen and Sebastian Schneeweiss
JAMA. 2009;301(1):33-34.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Outcomes in the Era of Bare-Metal Stents vs the Era of Drug-Eluting Stents—Reply
David J. Malenka, Jonathan S. Skinner, and F. Lee Lucas
JAMA. 2009;301(1):34.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2009 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.