Why don't stents prevent heart attack?



No study has ever documented that stents prevent future heart attack. But, in day-to-day practice, stents are frequently implanted for just this reason.

A little clarification. Stents do prevent heart attack--if the heart attack is already underway, either as an "acute myocardial infarction" or "unstable angina."

In other words, a plaque in a coronary artery can rupture just like a little volcano. Rather than spewing lava, the underlying plaque contents--fibrous tissue, inflammatory cells, cholesterol crystals, fatty material, debris--are exposed to flowing blood and trigger spasm of the artery and blood clot formation. A ruptured plaque is typically found in people who go to the emergency room with severe chest pain or have difficulty breathing.

A heart catheterization is performed, a severe (e.g., 90-100%--completely closed) is found. A stent in this situation is of clear-cut benefit.

What is not clearly beneficial is someone with no symptoms, symptoms only with physical activity that has been present for at least several months, or someone with a high heart scan score and no symptoms. In these circumstances, stent implantation does not reduce risk for future heart attack.

Why?



Take a look at this angiogram of a right coronary artery. You can seen plaque all along the artery (represented by areas that appear pinched off. There are at least 4 visible.)

Putting one 15 millimeter stent in the artery will only affect the area of artery stented. (Stents vary in length, but typically are 12-18 millimeters in length.) The right coronary artery is about 10 times or more this length. There are also two other arteries of similar length. A stent at one location will do nothing to affect the potential for rupture in any of the other plaque-laden areas.

Say a stent is implanted in the "worst" blockage in this right coronary artery, the plaque located at around 9 o'clock. What about all the other plaques? They can still rupture.

Why not put in many stents, say, 4 or 5, and stent all the visible plaques?

Two reasons: 1) Plaque you can't even see on an angiogram can still rupture, and 2) it is very costly (easily $30,000 at the very least), 3) incurs greater procedural risk, and 4) messes up the artery for future procedures, since a steel-lined artery that develops more disease in future will be more difficult to re-implant stents, bypass, or perform other procedural manipulations.

The point: Putting in stents does not reduce potential for plaque rupture in the entire artery.

What can prevent plaque rupture? That's the whole point of following an effective prevention program: prevent plaque rupture.

(Of course, this discussion cannot encompass the wide variety of potential situations that may cause your doctor to individualize your approach. Nonetheless, when advised to have an elective heart procedure, a healthy dose of skepticism and is clearly a good practice.)

Top image courtesy National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Comments (11) -

  • Get Primal

    2/13/2009 2:17:00 AM |

    Great post, it's too bad more effort and resources don't go into the initial prevention.  I'm a sales rep that works in the cath lab (peripheral vascular and vessel closure products), love the blog!

  • vin

    2/13/2009 9:57:00 AM |

    I don't ever remember my doctor ever talking about the chance of a plaque rupturing at one of the almost blocked points. His reason for putting in a stent at the worst point is to protect the patient from a total blockage at that point. So argument for a stent is to give the patient a few more years prior to a follow up bypass surgery.

  • Kiwi

    2/13/2009 10:07:00 AM |

    Hi Dr. Davis,
    What other procedures are likely in the future regarding blocked arteries? I understand dissolvable stents are being trialed. Are we likely to see any other developments?
    Thanks.

  • Lynn

    2/17/2009 3:45:00 AM |

    I am an otherwise very active and healthy 57 year old female who has already had 4 stents placed in my RCA following 2 separate MI's.  Each event was 5 years apart. Needless to say I feel like a time bomb.  I have visited several cardiologists and have finally found one who is looking at my CAD from a more aggressive standpoint and that is prevention. Following a recent cath procedure I have slightly 40% at the site of the last stenting.  This will no doubt need to be addressed but when?  I would prefer before I have another event!  However...I've yet to hear about what supplements (Vitamin D3 ) that could perhaps slow the progression of my disease of perhaps elminate/reduce the placque already there.
    Any suggestions?  If indeed you could answer, I'd prefer an email. Thanks for educating us!

  • Anonymous

    2/20/2009 2:32:00 AM |

    I am 45 year old (from India) have
    VERY strong history ( Father-3 Mi's)
    of Coronary disease and diabetes.
      My annual checkup showed
    TC- 282
    TG- 442
    LDL- 173
    HDL- 39
    Had slightly elevated #s before(10yr)
    My Internist sent me for a heart scan and MY SCORE is ZERO / ZERO /
    and ZERO, ANY comments Dr.

  • selahV

    2/27/2009 9:38:00 PM |

    I am scheduled for an angiogram next Friday.  My stress test showed what appears to be a blockage in a front artery of my heart, the doctor says.  What he didn't say was what would happen if I have a blockage when they get inside.  Should I be asking more questions?  what should I ask?

  • Anonymous

    6/29/2009 9:08:16 AM |

    I am a 47 year male from India and have undergone angiogram recently and the report shows there is 80% block in the main artery. Advice and guide whether  stent is adviceable if the patient is diabetic.

  • buy jeans

    11/3/2010 9:22:00 PM |

    (Of course, this discussion cannot encompass the wide variety of potential situations that may cause your doctor to individualize your approach. Nonetheless, when advised to have an elective heart procedure, a healthy dose of skepticism and is clearly a good practice.)

  • ultrasonic liposuction guide

    1/26/2011 5:42:45 AM |

    Medications are the best way to prevent this from happening.there is no reason to think stents would prevent heart attack. "What happens when you put a stent in is you're attacking one narrowing in the artery, but it's not the narrowing that's going to cause the next heart attack,"

  • how to

    2/3/2011 7:11:50 PM |

    I recently came across this article and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Really a nice post here!

  • ABBEY

    3/5/2011 6:01:21 AM |

    I am scheduled for an angiogram on Friday. My stress test showed what appears to be a blockage in an artery in front of my heart, says doctor. He did not say was what would happen if I have a crash when they are inside. Should I ask more questions? What should I do?

    people searches

Loading
Exploitation of trust

Exploitation of trust

Once upon a time, the tobacco industry was guilty of conducting a widespread, systematic, highly organized campaign to deliver their product to as much of the unsuspecting public as possible.

As clinical data mounted linking smoking and health problems like cancer and heart disease, tobacco producers labored fiercely to counter these claims despite darkening public sentiment. When individual company executives were questioned on why they continued to perpetuate the industry’s scandalous practices, the invariable justification offered was “Well, I had to pay my mortgage.” That tidy ends-justifies-the-means rationalization has a familiar ring when you examine the behavior of those in the heart "industry."

Things are not what they seem. The hospital, once an institution to serve the sick, a place for clergy, volunteers, and other altruists, has evolved into a business serving a thriving bottom line. You are the “product” they seek. The cardiologist, ostensibly in the service of alleviating heart disease, instead seeks to grow his checkbook by performing procedures that have nothing to do with lessening the burden of heart disease. He dives into the water to save drowning victim after drowning victim, but fails to simply toss in the life preserver that has been close at hand all along.

The woeful family practitioner, who is expected to bear undue responsibility for the broad spectrum of health, ignorantly permits heart disease to grow under his or her nose and, by default, allows heart disease to become the exclusive province of the proceduralist. Worse, the family practitioner or internist in the employ of the hospital (a situation that has quietly grown to encompass 80% of all primary care physicians) labors to fatten hospital business by directing patients into hospital services. The comparative lowly incomes of the primary care physician are substantially supplemented by participating in this huge revenue-generating machine called heart care.

The astounding grasp of the system has caused one of every 10 adults in the U.S. to have undergone a heart procedure. The lemming-like procession to the hospital creates a crowd mentality among some sectors of the frightened public. “My friends and neighbors have all had bypass operations. Sooner or later I guess it’s going to be my turn.”

Tragically, the system has grown through the exploitation of trust. The faith we have in doctors, hospitals, and the institutions and people associated with healthcare has been subverted into the service of profit. Many practitioners and institutions choose to operate under the guise of doing good, but instead capitalize on the public’s willingness to accept as fact the need for major heart procedures and all its associated costly trappings.

Comments (5) -

  • Diabetes Supply

    7/25/2008 5:16:00 AM |

    At first, your blood sugar level may rise so slowly that you may not know that anything is wrong. One-third of all people who have diabetes do not know that they have the disease. If you do have Type 2 Diabetes Symptom, they may include: Feeling thirsty. Having to urinate more than usual, Feeling more hungry than usual, Losing weight without trying to. http://diets-diabetes.blogspot.com/

  • Jenny

    7/25/2008 11:13:00 AM |

    Thanks for drawing attention to this very real problem.

    As you may have read in my blog, I went to my local hospital last December because I'd inhaled a small piece of peanut and the ER doctor and hospitalist did all they could to turn that visit into a cardiac emergency despite a completely normal EKG.

    Had I not been an ornery bitch I'd have ended up paying for the nuclear stress test they ordered for me on top of the several thousand bucks I was charged for staying over night with a monitor on me.

    My heart was 100% fine--all this cardiac nonsense was because I have the word "diabetes" on my chart and because my lung--which is in my chest, hurt--after 24 hours of coughing--which the ER doctor interpreted as "chest pain--Heart attack???.

    If I'd had that stress test with the false positives I might well have ended up with unnecessary surgery.

  • Jenny

    7/25/2008 2:11:00 PM |

    From a different Jenny  (Jennytoo):  You are getting to the essence of the problem, and it's not just cardiology that is rife with what is at bottom malpractice.  There is little incentive for the profession as a whole to know anything about or promote prevention, and many incentives from hospitals, drug and insurance companies to stick with the status quo or to change it in their corporate favor.  The formulaic, conventional statements purporting to be guidelines for prevention that are put out by various interest groups and in such publications as hospital-sponsored newsletters ("eat a 'balanced diet', avoid stress, etc.")  are useless sops to the concept of prevention.  It is, and I fear is going to remain, up to motivated individuals, both physicians and patients, to reshape the system, and it's going to be a long frustrating struggle.  It's my personal conviction that if just 4 things were promoted to the public, and people actually practiced them, we could change the health profiles of the majority of people in this country for the better within two years or less.  They are (1) education on and promotion of a true low-carbohydrate, whole foods, diet, (2) measurement and supplementation of Vitamin D3 (3)supplementation with DHA/EPA (found in Fish Oils) and (4)measurement and supplementation of  intracellular Magnesium.   I am not a health professional, and others may want to add to this list, but I don't think any strong case can be made against any of the items.  The wonderful and hopeful thing is that each of us can implement them ON OUR OWN, and thereby take charge of our own well-being.  (The Life Extension Foundation is one organization which provides access to lab tests you can request on your own.)  If you have a physician who is willing and capable of being your partner, you are richly blessed, and that is the ideal we all should hope for.   But in the more likely event that you do not have such a physician, and if your physician demonstrates little potential for becoming one, think about firing the one you have and finding another.  Sometimes we are forced by circumstances, particularly urgent ones, to deal with physicians who are not ideal, but the main impetus for change will come from us, the patients, and the expectations we communicate to our individual doctors.  In the meantime, we can be self-reliant in our own prevention practices.  Learn from Dr. Davis and Jenny Ruhl and the Dr.'s Eades and the Vitamin D Council (and many others), and put what you learn into practice for your own benefit, and when in health-care settings, be friendly and accommodating when you can and ornery when accommodating doesn't work.  Your health is your own, and shouldn't be at the mercy of any other whose interests are competing.

  • Dr. William Davis

    7/25/2008 4:41:00 PM |

    Eloquently said!

  • Mike Dodge

    7/28/2008 10:38:00 PM |

    I haven't visited the medical community in over 5 years. I think that I am healthier for that.

    In the past, I had lots of expensive tests done that resulted in nothing of significance being done, but lots of money spent. Doctors can easily scare people into having lots of tests done. Who wants to drop dead? If I break a bone, I will, most likely, go to a physician. I see no need to get the recommended no-symptom tests done as they are just looking for the needle in the haystack but finding lots of pitchforks.

Loading