Alzheimer’s DISEASE Destroys YOU & YOURS Cancer & Heart Attacks Are Different!

Alzheimer’s DISEASE Destroys YOU & YOURS Cancer & Heart Attacks Are Different!
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.

 Please Be Sure To

& Link to my My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide

To Give Hope & Information

 .
Hi,

many of you reading this web site/blog will have or will have had cancer or a heart attack – so you have had your nose pressed pretty hard against life’s exit door. You are also probably past those years of life where you feel immortal, and are now all too well aware that life is moving on!

You will by now, probably realise, that life is all too like a roll of toilet paper, when you don’t have a spare in the cupboard, the nearer the end you come the faster it seems to run out!

Cancer has been described, by some, as one of the best ways to die, as you continue to function relatively normally until either you recover (or remission) or you you are relatively near the end – The massively impaired tend, as a general rule, to suffer the indignities and or pain for a relatively short period.

Heart Attacks and strokes however can be far more unkind and threatening, leaving the patient chronically damaged in some cases – a stroke left a friend’s Father incontinent, without comprehensible communication skills, visibly angry and wheelchair bound for almost 10 years – many would believe a fate worse than death. Fortunately most outcomes of both strokes and heart attacks are not so cruel.

Having so far survived various bouts of cancer of various types and also a relatively serious heart attack I don’t believe I am alone in fearing Altzheimer’s or dementia. Chemo brain is irritating enough, where some of us who have had Chemo experience momentary lapses ion specific areas of memory – mine seem fortunately to be confined to names of people, places and events and only to last a few seconds.

Just imagine the early stages of Alzheimer’s or dementia where all too often one is aware that one is loosing one’s mind and will lose one’s independence, reason and personality – a fate that can not as yet be controlled.

What a horror and it is good to see some progress is being made in coping with the disease, all be it taking place at a glacial rate and I regret too slowly for me at my age! All I can do is hope that I will be spared the disease as in Britain today we still have the evil belief that it is kind to put an animal out of its suffering but that we should torture human beings by doing far too much to keep them alive.

If I find myself faced with Alzheimer’s, Dementia or a chronic stroke since my fellow countrymen have opted to permit torture of the chronically impaired, & EUthenasia is denied us, that I have sufficient ability left to take my own life.

The Three Stages of Alzheimer’s Disease

By Amy Bernstein

A diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease might come after a person develops a habit of losing the house keys or getting lost. But changes in the hippocampus, the part of the brain essential to forming memories, begin years before any symptoms appear. Once they emerge, the incurable disease advances through three stages. 

Each person may progress through Alzheimer’s stages at different speeds or experience symptoms in different ways. By understanding its typical course, you can be prepared for the road ahead and focus on living well with the disease.

Early Stage: Mild Alzheimer’s Disease

People are often diagnosed at this stage, as memory loss and other thinking problems become apparent. The person may notice his or her own memory lapses, such as forgetting familiar words. Or family and friends may notice changes, such as trouble handling money or paying bills.

Common difficulties in this stage include: 

  • Forgetting material that one has just read
  • Forgetting common words or names
  • Losing or misplacing valuable objects
  • Repeating questions
  • Taking longer to complete normal daily tasks
  • Trouble planning or organizing
  • Wandering and getting lost

Middle Stage: Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease

In this stage, damage occurs in areas of the brain controlling language, reasoning, sensory processing, and conscious thought. This stage can last for many years while a person gradually loses abilities that allow him or her to live independently. 

During this stage, other people may begin to notice symptoms. They may include:

  • Changes in sleep patterns, such as sleeping during the day and becoming restless at night
  • Confusion about where they are or what day it is
  • Forgetting past events or personal history
  • Forgetting personal details, such as home address or telephone number
  • Increased risk of wandering and getting lost
  • Moodiness or withdrawal, especially in social or mentally challenging situations
  • Needing help choosing appropriate clothing for the season or occasion
  • Not recognizing family and friends
  • Personality and behavior changes, such as paranoia and delusions, impulsive behavior, or compulsive, repetitive behavior like hand-wringing

Late Stage: Severe Alzheimer’s Disease

Basic abilities diminish in the final stage. A person can no longer carry on a conversation or respond to his or her environment. He or she will gradually lose the ability to walk. 

Special concerns for a person with late stage Alzheimer’s include:

  • Inability to communicate pain
  • Difficulty eating and drinking
  • Increasing personality changes
  • Vulnerability to infections, especially pneumonia

A person will likely need around-the-clock help to address extensive care needs. But loved ones can provide care by spending time with a person in the last stage of the disease.  

Diagnosing Alzheimer’s Disease

Researchers are looking for ways to find Alzheimer’s in its earliest stage, before symptoms appear. Studies suggest early detection through brain scans or blood and spinal fluid tests may be possible, but more research is needed before these tests become common practice.

Until there is a single diagnostic test, doctors use a combination of methods and tools to determine if a person has “possible” or “probable” Alzheimer’s dementia. A “possible” diagnosis is given if there may be another cause for the dementia. If no other cause can be found, the diagnosis is “probable” Alzheimer’s dementia.

To make a diagnosis, doctors may:

  • Ask for a medical history, including past medical problems, changes in health or abilities, and medical conditions affecting other family members, especially Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias
  • Carry out a physical exam with standard diagnostic tests, such as taking blood and urine samples
  • Conduct tests of memory, problem solving, attention, counting, and language
  • Perform brain scans, such as CT (computed tomography), MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), or PET (positron emission tomography)

In some cases, a brain autopsy after death can be performed to provide a positive diagnosis. 

When to Have a Dialogue With Your Doctor

If you or a loved one are concerned about Alzheimer’s, talk with your doctor. Symptoms of dementia are linked to many other conditions besides Alzheimer’s, including anemia, diabetes, and heart and lung problems. Sharing key details with your doctor can help him or her determine the cause and best course of treatment.

If the diagnosis is Alzheimer’s, your doctor will do more than offer treatment. He or she can be a valuable resource for answering questions and finding support services for you.

To view the original post CLICK HERE

RELATED:

Alzheimer’s and Dementia: What’s the Difference?

.
.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
.
 Please Be Sure To
& Link to my My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide To Give Others HOPE
I Have Been Fighting Cancer since 1997 & I’M STILL HERE!
I Have Cancer, Cancer Does NOT Have Me
I just want to say sorry for copping out at times and leaving Lee and friends to cope!
Any help and support YOU can give her will be hugely welcome.
I do make a lousy patient!

.
If YOU want to follow my fight against Cancer from when it started and I first presented with symptoms in Nov-1997 see The TAB at the Header of this Blog. called >DIARY of Cancer ….< just click and it will give you a long list of the main events in chronological order, many linked to specific blog postings.
.
Thoughts, articles and comments will be in chronological order in the main blog and can be tracked in the >ARCHIVE< in the Left Sidebar.
.
You may find the TABS >MEDICAL LINKS< and also >CANCER LINKS< of help, also many of the links in articles and >HOT LINKS< in the Sidebar.
.
YOU are welcome to call me, minded that I am NOT medically trained, if you believe I can help in ANY way. .

Enhanced by Zemanta

An Even Lower Systolic Pressure May Further Reduce Strokes & Heart Attacks

An Even Lower Systolic Pressure May Further Reduce Strokes & Heart Attacks
.

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins – Greg_L-W.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.

 Please Be Sure To

& Link to my My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide

To Give Hope & Information

 .
Hi,

Data on Benefits of Lower Blood Pressure Brings Clarity for Doctors and Patients

By GINA KOLATANOV. 9, 2015 

Dr. Marc Alan Pfeffer, a cardiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and professor of medicine at Harvard, said he would now feel obligated to help patients lower their blood pressure even further after the results of a federal study. Credit Charlie Mahoney for The New York TimesWhen the federal government announced in September that it had abruptly halted a large blood pressure study because its results were so compelling, doctors were left in frustrating limbo.The announcement said researchers had found that driving systolic blood pressure to levels far below what current guidelines recommend — less than 120 instead of 140 or 150 millimeters of mercury — can save lives and prevent heart disease and strokes. But they declined to release any data on the number of lives saved, the number of heart attacks prevented or other critical measures.

“How can anyone do anything different tomorrow with regard to blood pressure control without knowing more about what they found?” asked Dr. Harlan Krumholz, a cardiologist at Yale, echoing the concerns of other specialists.

On Monday, reporting at an American Heart Association meeting in Orlando, Fla., and in a paper published simultaneously in The New England Journal of Medicine, study investigators lifted the veil. Among the 9,361 hypertension patients followed for an average of 3.2 years, there were 26 percent fewer deaths (155 compared with 210) and 38 percent fewer cases of heart failure (62 compared with 100) among patients who achieved the systolic pressure target of 120 than among those who achieved the current 140 target.

Systolic pressure is the higher of the two blood pressure numbers and represents pressure on blood vessels when the heart contracts.

Over all, there was a 24 percent reduction — 243 compared with 319 — in people who had a heart attack, heart failure or stroke or died from heart disease, Dr. Paul K. Whelton, a principal investigator for the study, said.

The older participants did just as well as younger ones.

For millions of Americans with high blood pressure, the results could be transforming, said Dr. Marc Alan Pfeffer, a cardiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston who was not affiliated with the study.

Before now, Dr. Pfeffer said, if a patient over 50 years old with high cholesterol or another well-controlled risk factor for heart disease came into his office with systolic pressure of 136 he would pat the patient on the back and say, “Great job.” Now, he said, he would feel obligated to give the patient more hypertension drugs. Otherwise, he said, “I would have lost the opportunity to help another human being.”

MENDING HEARTS: GINA KOLATA ON PROGRESS AND CHALLENGES IN HEART DISEASE

  • Lower Blood Pressure Guidelines Could Be ‘Lifesaving,’ Federal Study SaysSEP. 12, 2015
  • A Possibly Lifesaving Guide to Heart AttacksJUNE 23, 2015
  • Blood Pressure, the Mystery NumberJUNE 23, 2015
  • Putting Stents to the TestJUNE 23, 2015
  • Building a Better ValveJUNE 22, 2015
  • A Sea Change in Treating Heart AttacksJUNE 21, 2015

RELATED COVERAGE
Well: 3 Things to Know About the Sprint Blood Pressure Trial NOV. 9, 2015

Jackson T. Wright Jr., a blood pressure expert at Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals Case Medical Center as well as a Sprint study investigator, said changing blood pressure guidelines could cause the falling death rate from heart attacks and stroke to drop even more.

Lower Blood Pressure Guidelines Could Be ‘Lifesaving,’ Federal Study Says SEPT. 11, 2015Glenn Lorenzen at church in Weymouth, Mass., in 2014.

He has had two heart attacks, and his systolic blood pressure, once above 200, is now 124.Mending Hearts: Blood Pressure, the Mystery Number JUNE 22, 2015

At least 17 million Americans will be affected by the findings right now, calculated Paul Muntner, an epidemiologist at the University of Alabama who was not affiliated with the study.

The study, called Sprint, enrolled patients ages 50 and older with high blood pressure. The patients also had at least one other risk factor for heart disease like smoking or a high cholesterol level, or they had kidney disease, or they were simply over the age of 75.

Half were assigned to a systolic pressure target below 140, in keeping with today’s medical practice. The rest were assigned a target pressure of less than 120.

The study was supposed to continue until 2017, but ended abruptly last summer when researchers announced they already had “potentially lifesaving” results.Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

Doctors have long wrestled with how low blood pressure should go.

Bringing it too far down, particularly in elderly people, can result in complications like dizziness and fainting. According to the results released Monday, about 5 percent of the study’s patients, or 220 people, with the 120 blood pressure target had serious complications over the course of the study — blood pressure so low it caused severe dizziness or fainting, or a reversible injury to the kidneys.

Among those with the 140 target, 118 had serious complications.
A complication the investigators worried about with blood pressures of 120 or lower — an abrupt drop in blood pressure when people stood up — actually occurred more often in those with the higher systolic pressure target.
“When we put those complications in the context of a 27 percent reduction in total mortality, it seems that the benefits outweigh the risks,” said David M. Reboussin, a biostatistician at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center and a principal investigator for the study.
What is most remarkable, researchers said, is that the improvements in death rates and rates of heart attacks occurred on top of improvements these patients already experienced as their blood pressures fell to 140.
To get their systolic pressures to 120, patients took an average of one additional blood pressure drug — 2.8 pills instead of 1.8.
Almost all blood pressure pills are inexpensive and available as generics.
It is now up to committees that formulate national guidelines to decide how to change their recommendations. Dr. Whelton, chairman of the heart association’s guidelines committee, said his group would meet on Monday night to consider the new data.
One issue is what to tell patients with diabetes, who were not included in this study.
A previous, much smaller study with diabetics that tested stringent blood sugar control along with a blood pressure of 120 found no reduction in heart attacks or deaths.
But many researchers are not convinced that the study, called Accord, proved that lower systolic pressure failed to help people with diabetes, because it was so much smaller and because blood sugar control was also being tested.
William Dougherty, 77, has a family history of heart disease.
With medication, his systolic pressure is reliably under 140.
Credit Charlie Mahoney for The New York Times
RECENT COMMENTS
Wait, they did all this with drugs? What about diet? What about exercise?
Smartysmom Oh my, article doesn’t mention the next steps in dizzy and fainting, which is falls and broken hips which is typically a death sentence for…
Eh Watson Well, if Martin Shkreli is reading this article, you can bet that blood pressure meds will soon cost $7,000 per pill.
Continue reading the main story:
Another question is what to advise people under age 50 and those over 50 with no risk factors other than high blood pressure.
“That will be a judgment call,” said Dr. Jackson T. Wright Jr., a study investigator who also is on the guidelines committee and who directs the hypertension program at University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland.
There also is the unanswered question of how low blood pressure should go.
A few patients in the new study lowered their systolic pressure to 110, but getting it below 120 was a challenge for most people.
Dr. Wright said it was almost inconceivable that there would be another large study comparing, say, a pressure of 110 to one of 120. “That is a very narrow window,” he said, and the expected differences in outcomes would be small, meaning the study would have to be very large and prolonged.
Even if the guidelines end up recommending a goal of less than 120 only for people like those in the study, doctors will face a challenge, said Dr. Aram V. Chobanian of Boston University Medical Center, who wrote a commentary in The New England Journal of Medicine.
A third to half of all patients fail to meet even the current blood pressure goals of 140 to 150.Some hypertension experts urge caution. Dr. Michael Alderman, a blood pressure expert at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, calculated that the study results mean six people per 1,000 annually would avoid a heart attack, stroke, or heart failure.
That, he said, can make it difficult to know how to advise individual patients.“If there were no, or minimal, harms like a safe one-time vaccination, it would be a no-brainer,” Dr. Alderman said. “But if it means decades-long pill taking by generally healthy folks, the decision gets more difficult.”
Dr. Krumholz of Yale said that while the study results were exciting, a lower blood pressure should not be seen as a mandate.
Getting pressure that low, he said, “comes at some risk.” Doctors will have to talk to patients about their preferences and goals, he said.
Dr. Pfeffer said the next challenge was to have these discussions with patients, but he said he was ready to start recommending a goal of less than 120 to appropriate motivated patients.
One of his patients, William Dougherty, 77, is ready. Mr. Dougherty, who lives in Boston, says he is healthy and his blood pressure has been controlled with one pill so it is reliably under 140. But he has a family history of heart disease, and that scares him.
“I will do anything if it lowers my risk of stroke or heart attacks,” he said. “Those are my biggest fears at my age.” 
To view the original article CLICK HERE.
.
.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
.
 Please Be Sure To
& Link to my My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide To Give Others HOPE
I Have Been Fighting Cancer since 1997 & I’M STILL HERE!
I Have Cancer, Cancer Does NOT Have Me
I just want to say sorry for copping out at times and leaving Lee and friends to cope!
Any help and support YOU can give her will be hugely welcome.
I do make a lousy patient!

.
If YOU want to follow my fight against Cancer from when it started and I first presented with symptoms in Nov-1997 see The TAB at the Header of this Blog. called >DIARY of Cancer ….< just click and it will give you a long list of the main events in chronological order, many linked to specific blog postings.
.
Thoughts, articles and comments will be in chronological order in the main blog and can be tracked in the >ARCHIVE< in the Left Sidebar.
.
You may find the TABS >MEDICAL LINKS< and also >CANCER LINKS< of help, also many of the links in articles and >HOT LINKS< in the Sidebar.
.
YOU are welcome to call me, minded that I am NOT medically trained, if you believe I can help in ANY way. .

Enhanced by Zemanta

Putting Stents To The Test & Treating Heart Attacks

Putting Stents To The Test & Treating Heart Attacks
.

 Please Be Sure To

& Link to my My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide

To Give Hope & Information

 .
 

Photo

 
A cardiologist showing the blocked arteries of a patient who had a right and left catheterization procedure at Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center in Camden, N.J. Credit Mark Makela for The New York Times

Millions of Americans have had stents — small wire cages — inserted in their coronary arteries to prop them open. And many are convinced the devices are protecting them from heart attacks. After all, a partly blocked artery is now cleared, and the pain in a heart muscle starved of blood often vanishes once the artery is open again.

But while stents unquestionably save lives of patients in the throes of a heart attack or a threatened heart attack, there is no convincing evidence that stents reduce heart attack risk for people suffering from the chest pains known as stable angina. These are people who feel tightness or discomfort walking up a hill, for example, because a partly blocked coronary artery is depriving their heart of blood. But the pain or tightness goes away if they stop and rest or just stay still. And there is a reasonable argument that drugs — cholesterol-lowering statins in particular — might be just as good at reducing such pain.

“It is kind of amazing that we don’t have the evidence,” said Dr. David J. Maron, the director of preventive cardiology at Stanford.

Photo

 
Dr. David J. Maron, the director of preventive cardiology at Stanford, examining angiograms. Credit Peter Earl McCollough for The New York Times

Now, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute is trying to find out whether stents do in fact prevent heart attacks. The answer could change the standard of care for the more than half a million Americans annually who receive a new diagnosis of heart disease after they see a doctor for angina. Heart disease remains the biggest killer of Americans despite significant treatment advances in the past decade.

The typical treatment for angina is to thread a narrow catheter up from a blood vessel in the groin to the heart, squirt in a dye that allows a cardiologist to see blockages in arteries on X-rays, and then insert a stent in the blocked areas. Stents are safe but expensive. Medicare payments vary depending on what kind of stent is used and how many, but are generally above $10,000 and can be more than $17,000.

And stents are not always a permanent solution to chest pain, as Albert Nassar of Brooklyn discovered. When he had angina four years ago, the reason seemed clear and the solution straightforward. An angiogram — the test in which dye is injected into the coronary arteries — showed one was 90 percent blocked. When a doctor inserted a stent to open that artery, the pain vanished.

But three years later, Mr. Nassar, 59, again felt tightness in his chest as he rode a recumbent bike at the gym. He said he expected another stent, but his cardiologist surprised him. He told Mr. Nassar that the medical profession does not actually know if stents help people like him with moderate to severely blocked coronary arteries.

Then he asked Mr. Nassar if he would be part of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute clinical trial, known as Ischemia, and have his treatment decided randomly between two options. If he was assigned to one group, his doctors would look at his blocked artery with X-rays and open it mechanically with a stent or, if the X-rays showed he was among the minority whose blockage could not be opened with a stent, with bypass surgery. He would also be asked to take drugs and change his lifestyle to protect his heart. In the other, his treatment would consist solely of drugs and the lifestyle changes. There would be no peeking at his blockage.

Mr. Nassar leapt at the chance and when he was assigned to take the drugs — a statin, blood pressure drugs and an aspirin — he was delighted.

“I didn’t feel the urge to have another surgical procedure,” he said. “I’ve had enough of those.”

The idea that opening blocked arteries saves lives dates to the 1970s and ’80s. In those decades, neither stents nor statins were used. The only treatment for blocked arteries was bypass surgery, a major operation in which the ribs are split open and a patient is put on a heart-lung machine while the heart is stopped. A surgeon bypasses the blockage with a blood vessel taken from elsewhere in the body.

Studies at the time had found that surgery was better for patients with severe blockages of major coronary arteries than not having surgery.

Stents were introduced in the 1990s, and because they relieved pain and were far less invasive than bypass surgery, they became the treatment of choice. Doctors and patients started to believe they also saved lives in stable patients, though there was no solid evidence of that.

“The thought was, better to go in and open it up,” said Dr. Harmony R. Reynolds, a cardiologist at NYU Langone Medical Center and a principal investigator in the study that Mr. Nassar joined. “But now meds have gotten so good that it is not clear surgery adds anything for stable patients.”

Researchers tried to get an answer with a big federal study, called Courage, that was published in 2007. But many cardiologists said the study was flawed and they did not believe its conclusion that stents failed to prevent heart attacks and deaths.

In Courage, as in the new study, participants were given stents and intensive drug therapy —– a statin, blood pressure drugs and aspirin — or just the medicines. The criticism, though, was that doctors may have cherry-picked patients, excluding the sickest. Because angiograms revealed blockages in arteries before patients were invited to enroll in the trial, doctors who believed stents were lifesaving may never have asked patients with the most severe disease to join the study.

The result, skeptics said, was that most patients in the study were at such low risk that it did not matter which treatment they received. They were certain to do well, so the study proved nothing about whether stents worked.

Because of the doubts about that study and ingrained habits, medical practice was largely unchanged by its findings. A recent study, which analyzed recorded conversations between cardiologists and patients with stable angina, found that 75 percent of the cardiologists recommended stents and when they did, their patients almost always complied. And, the study found, on the rare occasions when the cardiologists presented both stents and medical treatment as options, none of the patients chose stenting.

The new study aims to avoid the methodological flaw in the 2007 Courage study. Patients who agree to participate are not given angiograms before being assigned a treatment. Instead, they are accepted into the trial on the basis of noninvasive tests that indicate blocked arteries and high risk of a heart attack. Their doctors know only that an artery is blocked — not which one or how much — so they are not able to pluck out patients they believe need stents and prevent them from entering the trial.

Photo

 
A coronary stent. They are safe, but expensive. Credit Peter Earl McCollough for The New York Times

Underlying the debate about the utility of stents is an uncertainty about how and why heart attacks occur.

For years, the common notion was they were caused by a plumbing problem. In this view, plaque — pimplelike lumps — partly blocked a coronary artery and grew until no blood could get through, and a stent was needed to open an artery before it closed completely.

But a leading hypothesis says there is no predicting where a heart attack will originate. It could start anywhere there is plaque, even if the plaque is not obstructing the flow of blood in an artery. Unpredictably, a piece of plaque can burst open. Blood starts to clot on the injured area. Soon, the blood clot clogs blocks the artery. The result is a heart attack.

It is known that certain plaques, with thin walls and bursting with fat-filled white blood cells, are prone to rupture. A study published in 2011 found that only a third of heart attacks originated in plaques that were blocking at least half of an artery, as seen on an angiogram. The rest began with the rupture of plaques that appeared to be causing no problems.

According to this view of how and why heart attacks happen, stenting would not be protective because people with atherosclerosis have arteries studded with plaque. The partly blocked area visible in an angiogram is no more likely to be the site of a heart attack than any other with plaque. But statins could work because they change the nature of plaques, making them less likely to rupture.

Although stents relieve chest pain, today’s medical therapy can, too, though it may take weeks or months.

But proving whether stents make a difference is turning out to be harder than expected. Many doctors and patients have such strong opinions about the value of stenting that recruitment for the new study has been difficult. Stents have become part of the fabric of heart disease care. Former President George W. Bush, for example, had a treadmill stress test in the summer of 2013 as part of a physical examination. When the test indicated he might have a blocked artery, he had an angiogram. It showed a partial blockage that a cardiologist opened with a stent.

The challenge now is to get Ischemia done and get some answers that might not be disputed. In the past two years, researchers randomized nearly 2,000 patients for the trial at the 300 participating medical centers. The plan is to 

Treating a Heart Attack

Doctors must first reopen the blocked artery and restore the flow of blood to the heart muscles.

Doctors insert a hollow catheter through the groin or an arm, threading it up a major artery and into the heart.

A deflated balloon is passed through the catheter to the site of the blockage.

The balloon is surrounded by a metal mesh stent. Inflating the balloon opens the artery and locks the stent in place.

Hospitals have been working to reduce the time needed to insert stents in patients having heart attacks.

“Cardiologists think this is a very important study intellectually,” said Dr. Maron, who is one of the study’s authors. “But when it comes to their own patients, some cardiologists balk, even though they know we don’t have the answer.”

The issue potentially affects many heart patients. “Half the people over 65 have blockages,” Dr. Gregg W. Stone, an interventional cardiologist at Columbia, said. “If you have some degree of atherosclerosis, you have blockages.”

And once a stress test or an angiogram reveals a blockage, it can be hard to ignore a partly blocked artery, hard to avoid thinking a stent has to help.

“People believe that if they have a blockage, they have to fix it mechanically,” said Dr. Judith S. Hochman, the study chairwoman for the Ischemia trial and a cardiologist at NYU Langone. “It seems logical, but in medicine, many things that seem logical are not true.”

Not only do cardiologists find it hard to fight their own feelings that stenting makes sense, they also find it hard to persuade patients to try medical therapy, said Dr. Brahmajee Nallamothu, an interventional cardiologist at the University of Michigan.

The concept that stenting helps, he said, “is a paradigm so deeply set on the part of the public and a lot of doctors that it is tough to overcome.”

Mr. Nassar was one of the rare patients who did not hesitate to enter the trial. Though stents had relieved his pain in the past, they were no panacea. Like most heart patients, he had never taken the most important drug for those with his condition: a statin.

So far, he says he is happy with his drug treatment. His angina is gone.

“I feel no pain,” he said.

To view the original of this article CLICK HERE

.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
.
 Please Be Sure To
& Link to my My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide To Give Others HOPE
I Have Been Fighting Cancer since 1997 & I’M STILL HERE!
I Have Cancer, Cancer Does NOT Have Me
I just want to say sorry for copping out at times and leaving Lee and friends to cope!
Any help and support YOU can give her will be hugely welcome.
I do make a lousy patient!

.
If YOU want to follow my fight against Cancer from when it started and I first presented with symptoms in 1998 see The TAB at the Header of this Blog. called >DIARY of Cancer ….< just click and it will give you a long list of the main events in chronological order, many linked to specific blog postings.
.
Thoughts, articles and comments will be in chronological order in the main blog and can be tracked in the >ARCHIVE< in the Left Sidebar.
.
You may find the TABS >MEDICAL LINKS< and also >CANCER LINKS< of help, also many of the links in articles and >HOT LINKS< in the Sidebar.
.
YOU are welcome to call me, minded that I am NOT medically trained, if you believe I can help in ANY way. .

Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins

tel: 01594 – 528 337
Accuracy & Copyright Statement: CLICK HERE
Summary, archive, facts & comments on UKIP: http://UKIP-vs-EUkip.com
DO MAKE USE of LINKS & >Right Side Bar< & The Top Bar >PAGES<
Also:
Details & Links: http://GregLanceWatkins.com
UKIP Its ASSOCIATES & DETAILS: CLICK HERE
Views I almost Totally Share: CLICK HERE
General Stuff archive: http://gl-w.blogspot.com
General Stuff ongoing: http://gl-w.com
Health Blog. Archive: http://GregLW.blogspot.com
Health Blog. Ongoing: http:GregLW.com

TWITTER: Greg_LW

Enhanced by Zemanta