Long-term safety and efficacy of the Resolute stent: 5-year results from the RESOLUTE China Registry: RESOLUTE China Registry 5-year outcomes.

AIMS: Long-term clinical outcome data for second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are critical for the assessment of safety and efficacy. Five-year results from the RESOLUTE China Registry are presented in this report. METHODS AND RESULTS: The RESOLUTE China Registry is a prospective, multicentre, observational study for all-comers requiring coronary stent implantation. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at one year, and the main secondary endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis at one year. Additional secondary endpoints assessed up to 5 years include rates of all deaths, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) and target lesion revascularisation (TLR). A total of 1,800 patients were enrolled from December 2010 to March 2012 at 30 sites in China and implanted with Resolute DES. At 5 years, TLF was 9.8%, TVMI 3.2%, TLR 4.6% and very late stent thrombosis 0.5%. Results of pre-specified subgroup analyses show 5-year TLF rates of 14.3% for diabetics and 13.4% for patients with chronic total occlusions. CONCLUSIONS: The RESOLUTE China Registry is the largest study of Asian patients treated with second-generation Resolute DES. Clinical outcomes illustrate a robust safety and efficacy profile of Resolute DES in a real-word Asian population, including favourable performance in complex patient subsets.

Teachers with LD: Ongoing negotiations with discourses of disability.

The purpose of this study is to examine how 4 teachers with learning disabilities (LD) negotiate multiple, complex, and sometimes contradictory discourses of disabilities in constructing their own understandings of LD. We chose to study teachers with LD because of their unique access to at least 3 different sources of knowledge about LD: (a) professional discourses on disability, (b) mainstream cultural messages about LD, and (c) insights gained from their own life experience. We drew on aspects of critical discourse analysis and narrative inquiry for this investigation. Our findings indicate that participants draw on these discourses and on their teaching experience in various and complex ways to construct meaning about LD. In some instances, participants use the dominant discourses; at other times, they work to subvert these meanings. Yet, paradoxically, whether speaking with or against these meanings, their voices are inescapably engaging with authoritative discourses and cultural scripts surrounding disability.

Interrupting the discourse: a response to Reid and Valle.

Reid and Valle (in this issue) illustrate how discourse within the field of learning disabilities (LD) determines what can and cannot be said and shapes what counts as knowledge or truth. Because basic assumptions about disability often remain unquestioned, Reid and Valle ask us to focus on the epistemological foundations of the field of LD. They demonstrate how discourse, far from being simply an academic or abstract theoretical pursuit, has direct material consequences for people labeled as having LD. In this response, I highlight some of the ways that the discourse in the LD field is getting in the way of truly transforming education for all learners and impeding our ability to ask the hard questions about our own complicity in issues such as the overrepresentation of students of color and the inaccessibility of general education learning environments.