A Maryland interventional cardiologist has resigned his hospital privileges after an internal audit revealed that he was placing stents in patients with 35% to 60% stenosis. In general, the American College of Cardiology recommends stent placement in patients with 70% stenosis; however, within certain, more aggressive circles of cardiologist, it has become more common for physicians to stent lesions that are less significant. In patients where there is no objective evidence of ischemia, there is no benefit to the patients, yet the care is more expensive and riskier.Currently, The Lyon Firm is representing a Cincinnati family whose beloved husband and father suffered a heart attack following a stent placement in an artery that was less than 50% occluded. The patient did not have any objective evidence of ischemia on stress test, and the physician failed to implement other useful tools to assess whether the lesion was flow restrictive. There are several experts retained to defend this standard of care as "judgment call". The case in MD and the Cincinnati case demonstrate the over use of stents within this extremely profitable industry and the unjustifable risks.
