FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 353:2404-2408 December 1, 2005 Number 22 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by Moliterno, D. J. Related Article by Windecker, S. Related Article by Dibra, A. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The article by Dibra et al. (Aug. 18 issue)¹ advances our understanding of the differences between paclitaxel-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents when used to prevent restenosis in patients with diabetes. However, in this study, the rate of in-segment restenosis was 16.5 percent in the paclitaxel-stent group and only 6.9 percent in the sirolimus-stent group (P=0.03) at nine months after intervention, and revascularization was performed in lesions that were complex (type B2 or C) in a high percentage: 74 percent in the paclitaxel-stent group, and 82 percent in the sirolimus-stent group. This is very different from the results . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Vaitkus, P. T. (2006). Common Sense, Dollars and Cents, and Drug-Eluting Stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 48: 268-269 [Full Text]