Drugs Just as Good and Much Cheaper than Stents for Delayed Treatment of Heart Attacks

A heart attack is a very severe occurrence, and should be treated as soon as possible, ideally within hours of the attack. However, some people are not diagnosed or treated in nonfatal heart attacks for days or even a couple weeks after their attack. The normal approach to treatment in these patients upon discovering a completely blocked artery has been to put in a stent to open up the occlusion, and follow up with a subsequent drug treatment. However, a new study has shown that the stent might be completely unnecessary, a large waste of money.

In a study of about 2000 patients, Dr Judith Hochman from New York University concluded that a drug only treatment was just as effective as placing a stent. All of these patients had had a heart attack at least three days before being treated, and were found to have a completely blocked artery but they were otherwise stable. This seems very counterintuitive, that one would be able to do just as well letting drugs slowly break up a clogged artery when it could be instantly fixed by a stent, but Dr. Hochman found the drugs only to be just as effective. The absence of a stent placement would be more convenient for the patient as they would not have to undergo an invasive operation, and it would be much cheaper as well. This would also help cut down on the costs of medical treatment as a whole, if needless operations were reduced.

In the comparison of subjects with a stent to those without, those getting a stent did report slightly less chest pain and had a better cardiac assessment score after four months. However, in subsequent results, after 8 months or a year, these differences had vanished. Both sets of patients were leading equal lifestyles with no problems. The patients without stents were just as healthy, but they had saved up to $10,000 by receiving drugs only. If this turns out to become a reliable method of safe treatment for heart attack victims, with about a million attacks happening each year in the U.S., the savings could be astronomical.

Author: Catharine Paddock

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/139837.php

Posted By Brian Bass, Section 502