Surgery, Stenting Fare Equally Well in Preventing Stroke

Reader Comments
Back to article

In the 3rd paragraph of the article, the following is stated: "because half of the patients had symptoms of heart disease in the carotid artery, while the other half were symptom-free."
By chance is this an error in the article? When determining the significance of carotid narrowing it is symptoms of stroke and TIA that we are concerned with. These are different than symptoms of heart disease.
Please clarify and or correct this statement so that readers are not mislead.

Ann of NY 8:39AM May 27, 2010

Although many headlines equate the two, it looks like surgery is the better option (read the numbers above). Natural, because with surgery the doctor can see to work, whereas stenting is like building a ship in a bottle (and the bottle is painted black).
The numbs don't lie: surgery is better for the patient. The best that can be said is, "Stenting is almost as safe as surgery."

Hopefully Not A Patient of DE 9:42PM May 26, 2010

I think that all of the latest reports about less expensive medical services, less medical screening for all kinds of cancer are rather timely. Perhaps this is a planned strategy to help sell the concept of diminished care in order to
help sell the Health Care Reform concept to the wary public.
Less expensive but higher rates of death and blood clots are not a good outcome just to save money. If the President gets his way the doctor and the patient will not have the right to make a patient centered decision about this procedure. The doctor and the patient will have to select the inexpensive procedure.

Deborah of PA 8:48PM May 26, 2010