Dr. Paul Chan sat down with me recently to talk about the study published this week in JAMA that he served as lead author on. The article, “Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.” has generated hundreds of news reports about “unnecessary stenting”, “overuse of angioplasty”, etc.
In my exclusive interview with Dr. Chan, we talked about the real meaning of this study, what it was meant to do (benchmark the use of PCI in the U.S.) and how it’s being (mis) interpreted by the press (I’ll be discussing this aspect in a subsequent post). Continue reading
Dr. Ralph Brindis is the Immediate Past President of the American College of Cardiology and helmed the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) since its inception in 1997 — this is the registry that was the source for the data analyzed and reported in yesterday’s JAMA study, “
A major study of a half-million angioplasties, published today1 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), refutes two major myths about angioplasty and stent use in the United States: myth #1, that angioplasty is vastly overused and unnecessary in most cases; and myth #2, that most angioplasty is used in stable patients and therefore has little or no benefit over drugs in reducing death or heart attacks.
RSS Feed
