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—Reply

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

In Reply: In response to Dr Beri, we excluded patients with prior revascularization because we were interested in studying the natural history of treating de novo disease, not the treatment of graft disease or a restenosis. We made no direct comparison of the outcomes of bare-metal stents vs drug-eluting stents because we believed such an analysis would be confounded. Bias could arise for 2 reasons. First, if patients with better unmeasured health are treated with drug-eluting stents, the apparent benefits of drug-eluting stents would be biased upward. Second, if higher-quality hospitals (for example, teaching hospitals) adopted drug-eluting stents more rapidly, the apparent benefits of drug-eluting stents would again be overstated.

Evidence for such bias is shown in the Figure, which displays 2-year rates of death or ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) month-by-month from February 2002 through December 2003 for patients receiving stents who met our inclusion criteria. Before the availability . . . [Full Text of this Article]

David J. Malenka, MD
david.malenka@hitchcock.org
Section of Cardiology
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
Lebanon, New Hampshire

Jonathan S. Skinner, PhD
Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice
Dartmouth College
Hanover, New Hampshire

F. Lee Lucas, PhD
Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation
Maine Medical Center
Portland



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
Abhimanyu Beri
JAMA. 2009;301(1):33.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

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  






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.