Can we afford to eliminate restenosis? Can we afford not to?

Dan Greenberg, Ameet Bakhai, David J. Cohen

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

108 Scopus citations


Over the past decade, coronary stenting has emerged as the dominant form of percutaneous coronary revascularization. However, bare metal stents remain limited by a high incidence of restenosis, leading to frequent repeat revascularization procedures and substantial economic burden. Antiproliferative drug-eluting stents (DES) have recently demonstrated dramatic reductions in rates of restenosis, compared with conventional stenting, but important concerns about their costs have been raised. In this article, we summarize current evidence on the economic impact of restenosis and explore the potential benefits and economic outcomes of DES. In addition to examining the long-term costs of this promising technology, we consider the potential cost-effectiveness of DES from a health care system perspective and the impact of specific patient, lesion, and provider characteristics on these parameters.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)513-518
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Issue number4
StatePublished - 18 Feb 2004
Externally publishedYes


  • Bare metal stent(s)
  • Coronary artery bypass graft surgery
  • Coronary artery disease
  • Diagnosis-related group
  • Drug-eluting stent(s)
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Quality of life
  • Quality-adjusted life-year
  • Target vessel revascularization

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Can we afford to eliminate restenosis? Can we afford not to?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this