CardioExchange Archive

CardioExchange, an NEJM practice community for medical professionals dedicated to improving cardiac patient care, was active from 2009 to 2015. CardioExchange fostered discussion between clinicians from across the globe.

January 21st, 2013

Selections from Richard Lehman’s Literature Review: January 21st

CardioExchange is pleased to reprint selections from Dr. Richard Lehman’s weekly journal review blog at BMJ.com. Selected summaries are relevant to our audience, but we encourage members to engage with the entire blog.

NEJM  17 Jan 2013  Vol 368

A Review of Drug-Eluting Stents (pg. 254): It’s time to stop watching the snow falling by the lamp-posts, close the curtains, poke the fire and get out some old DVDs. Now what have we here? The Star Wars trilogy, Lord of the Rings, Agatha Christie’s Poirot: the Complete Collection—and oh look, Drug Eluting Stents from NEJM studios. Starring Giulio Stefanini as Sirolimus and David Holmes as Paclitaxel. How about it, folks? Nah—let’s have Game of Thrones. We prefer bare metal.

Lancet  19 Jan 2013  Vol 381

Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (pg. 242): Many Lancet seminars get bogged down in endless genomic detail and speculation, but because most hypertrophic cardiomyopathy has now been shown to be due to mutations of just 11 genes, the authors can concentrate on clinical issues, which they do very well. “After more than 50 years, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy has been transformed from a rare and largely untreatable disorder to a common genetic disease with management strategies that permit realistic aspirations for restored quality of life and advanced longevity.”

Categories: General
Tags: ,


You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

One Response to “Selections from Richard Lehman’s Literature Review: January 21st”

  1. Jean-Pierre Usdin, MD says:
    January 23, 2013 at 4:55 pm

    Thank you again dr Lehman for your short but instructive comment about the paper in NEJM related to DES.
    I wonder at the end of my reading why this paper was so in favour of DES, in spite of many problems in real life i.e. (my) every day practice!
    If we believe this “review article” every coronary revascularization needs a DES!
    You gave me the answer:
    the authors are both in close relation with CYPHER and PACLITAXEL intra coronary devices manufactors!
    This mention does not appear in the printed version of NEJM: you have to go to NEJM.org
    Thank you for having done this search for me (for us!)
    Do you think there is a kind of “conflicts of interest”?
    Unbelievable from a 200 year-old Lady!