Heart stent alternatives could reduce risk of clots
Over the past six months, the use of drug eluting stents has dropped significantly. As doctors and patients have developed valid concerns about stent side effects which could cause heart attacks or potentially fatal blood clots years after the stent is implanted, alternatives to drug coated stents are being considered and the manufacturers face lawsuits from those injured by the small mesh devices.
>>INFORMATION: Drug eluding stent problems
Drug eluting stents were designed to improve upon bare-metal stents by containing a drug coating which releases medication to prevent scar tissue from forming and blocking the artery. However, studies have confirmed that the newer heart stents could actually cause fatal blood clots and heart attacks, or result in a reclogging of the artery.
There are two medicated stents currently available in the United States, the Johnson & Johnson Cordis Cypher Stent and the Boston Scientific Taxus Express Stent. After they were introduced in 2003 and 2004, the new stents quickly replaced bare-metal stents. By early 2006, estimates indicate that drug eluting stints were used in 90% of all proceedures. However, since studies have been released regarding the dangers of medicated stents, doctors have considered alternative treatments and are slowly moving away from the potentially dangerous devices. According to recent estimates, drug coated stents now only account of 70% of all stents placed, and each month the number continues to fall.
DRUG COATED STENT ALTERNATIVES
There are several new stent studies which are raising further questions about the continued use of medicated stents over other alternatives. Alternatives to drug coated stents include using older bare-metal stents, bypass surgery or medication to treat the blockage.
Next week, a stent study known as COURAGE will be presented at a meeting of the American College of Cardiology in New Orleans. It is expected that this study comparing the benefits and dangers of stents during angioplasty to medications designed to reduce the risk of heart attacks and death could further hurt sales of medicated stents. The study shows that there was no difference in terms of preventing heart attacks and deaths for the group of patients reviewed. Experts will be closely evaluating the results of this study which will be presented Tuesday, March 27.
Three other studies and editorials will be published later this month raising questions about the clinical and cost effectiveness of stents when compared with bypass surgery. The research suggests that minimally invasive bypass surgery may produce better long term results and may be a better option for some heart patients.
Many physicians are also considering bare-metal stents, which are considerably less expensive and do not require patients to remain on anti-clotting therapy for as long of a time after the placement. Bare metal stents cost approximately $800 each, compared with about $2,000 a piece for medicated stints. Given the long-term risk of blood clots, patients receiving drug eluding stents also require a medication to reduce clotting, such as Plavix. However, Plavix requires patients spend another $1,500 a year for the drug, and could cause serious harm if it is stopped or taken inconsistently. There are also concerns regarding Plavix side effects which could lead to gastrointestinal bleeding, ulcers and a blood disorder known as TTP (thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura).
DRUG ELUTING STENT LAWSUITS
Many individuals who received a medicated stent since 2003 are angry over the manufacturers’ failure to properly study their product and warn about the problems which could increase their risk of death years after the procedure. As a result of the stent makers’ actions, they not only face declining sales, but will also have to answer to drug eluting stint lawsuits which are being filed on behalf of individuals who suffered a heart attack or reclogging of the artery.
>>INFORMATION: Drug eluting stent lawsuits
The recent decline in use of medicated stents in favor of other alternatives demonstrates how important it is that medical product manufacturers properly warn of problems and side effects. Information regarding the dangers of drug eluting stents clearly impacts the “risk – benefit analysis” which doctors and patients consider before deciding on a course of treatment.
The drug eluding stent lawyers at Saiontz & Kirk, P.A. represent those who were injured by these dangerous devices. To determine if you, a friend or family member may be entitled to compensation, request a free claim evaluation.
