Should We Still Have Bare-Metal Stents Available in Our Catheterization Laboratory?
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 28750704.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.057.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The introduction of bare-metal stents (BMS) has represented a major advancement over plain old balloon angioplasty in the management of coronary artery disease. However, the high rates of target lesion revascularization associated with use of BMS have led to the development of drug-eluting stents, which require prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy due to the increased risk of late and very late stent thrombosis. The improvements in newer-generation drug-eluting stents have translated into better safety and efficacy compared with earlier generation and BMS, thus allowing shorter dual antiplatelet therapy duration. Here, we aim to provide reasons as to why we still need BMS in our cardiac catheterization laboratory.
Medical subject headings
- Cardiac Catheterization
- Coronary Artery Disease
- Laboratories, Hospital
- Stents