Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
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.
BMJ 2007;334 (24 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.39162.436458.3A
Douglas Kamerow, US editor
dkamerow@bmj.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Stents are in the news. Which kind should you recommend: drug eluting stents, which may prevent early restenosis better but are more expensive and may lead to late thrombosis? Or bare metal stents, which may not be as good at preventing restenosis initially but are cheaper and less likely to lead to late thrombosis? News reports say that this controversy has now led to fewer doctors recommending drug eluting stents and some insurance companies reconsidering their coverage of them.
The larger question, of course, is not just which type of stent to use. It is, "What are the relative advantages and disadvantages of the various treatments for patients with symptomatic coronary artery diseasemedical therapy only, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with stents, and coronary artery bypass grafting." This week's BMJ helps to answer this question.
Omer Aziz and colleagues examine the clinical effectiveness of surgery versus stenting for isolated left anterior descending
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?