(Circulation. 2006;113:2262-2265.)
© 2006 American Heart Association, Inc.
Editorial |
From the Cardiovascular Division, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Womens Hospital, Boston, and Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology, Cambridge (C.R., E.R.E.), Mass.
Correspondence to Drs Campbell Rogers and Elazer Edelman, Brigham and Womens Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail crogers@mit.edu and ere@mit.edu
Key Words: Editorials registries restenosis stents failure
An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract. |
| Introduction |
|---|
Failures are the preparation for...victories.Ralph Waldo Emerson1
Mechanical failure is a characteristic of a material or device and not necessarily an indication of inadequacy. All devices will fail under some specific stress. It is only failure at the lowest levels of stress that may represent inadequacy. Stress on a material, for example, rises with strain until a critical load is exceeded, at which point the material fatigues and loses mechanical integrity. Failure analysis, the science by which these conditions are rigorously defined, is an important component of device design, development, and use. Once the transition point to failure is identified, material use can be restricted to the zone of safety or modified so as to have this zone expanded. Just as the characterization of a material is incomplete unless pushed to the limits of load bearing, characterization of an implantable device is incomplete unless preclinical and clinical environments test the limits of device functionality. It was in this light in 1999 that we noted the impossibility of defining the functional limits of novel bare metal stents in head-to-head trials, which, by necessity, could only include lesions into which the predicate device (the Palmaz-Schatz stent, Cordis, Warren, NJ) could be placed.2 Glimpses of superiority of 1 bare metal stent over another were only possible via registry data, "real world" reports, or small studies comparing advanced stent designs3 where more diverse patients and lesions could be considered and more granular determination of lesion- or patient-specific predictors of failure determined.
Article p. . . [Full Text of this Article]
Related Article:
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
H. Y. Chen, J. Hermiller, A. K. Sinha, M. Sturek, L. Zhu, and G. S. Kassab Effects of stent sizing on endothelial and vessel wall stress: potential mechanisms for in-stent restenosis J Appl Physiol, May 1, 2009; 106(5): 1686 - 1691. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Shah, J. P Casas, J. A Cooper, I. Tzoulaki, R. Sofat, V. McCormack, L. Smeeth, J. E Deanfield, G. D Lowe, A. Rumley, et al. Critical appraisal of CRP measurement for the prediction of coronary heart disease events: new data and systematic review of 31 prospective cohorts Int. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2009; 38(1): 217 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Predictors of Restenosis After Drug-Eluting Stent Use Journal Watch Cardiology, June 22, 2006; 2006(622): 2 - 2. [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
Minerva BMJ, June 3, 2006; 332(7553): 1342 - 1342. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2006 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |