This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Michael E. DeBakey, MD; Gerald M. Lawrie, MD

JAMA. 1979;241(22):2393-2395.

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

THE REPLY of Hultgren et al¹ to our COMMENTARY on the assessment of coronary bypass² fails to answer the most serious criticisms of the Veterans Administration Cooperative Study, presents the data from Baylor College of Medicine in an inaccurate, distorted form, and draws yet another set of false conclusions.

Our original COMMENTARY was published on Feb 27,1978, only a few weeks after publication of the report of Read and associates.³ At the time our COMMENTARY was written, we quoted accurately from the only available source of the VA Cooperative Study.⁴ The mean follow-up of 21 months was therefore quoted accurately.⁴ Read and co-workers³ subsequently published a follow-up on their patients of up to four years. Only 114 of 332 surgical patients (34%) had, however, been followed up to four years compared with a full five or more years' follow-up for all our patients. To . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Baylor College of Medicine Houston

From the Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030 (Dr DeBakey).

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