Chelation Therapy Could Reduce Heart Problem, Study Finds, Yet Cardiologists Remain Skeptic

Researchers and cardiologists have long cast chelation therapy aside. The treatment's goal is to remove heavy metals from the body in attempt to help relieve hardened arteries. Now, a recent 10-year study has found that the alternative therapy method can help heart attack patients to reduce future risk of serious heart complications. However, researchers are still unable to fully convince cardiologists of its proposed benefits.

Although patients reacted positively to the therapy, the results were modest, according to the study's findings. Experts are now concerned that patients will be encouraged to participate in the potentially dangerous treatment despite the lack of hard evidence that proves it effective.

Chelation therapy has been around for decades, first introduced around World War II as a remedy for the arsenic-based poison gas called Lewisite. It also used to treat lead poisoning in Navy members that repainted the ships' hulls. Researchers later claimed that it could be used to remove mineral-rich plaque deposits that can cause atherosclerosis, which can cause arteries to harden and lead to serious heart problems. However, cardiologists remain skeptic.

"It's a type of medical quackery that has been around for many decades," said Dr. Steven Nissen, who's the chair of cardiovascular medicine at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio.

Despite the warnings, chelation therapy has been gaining popularity. A National Center for Health Statistics report shows that nearly 111,000 patients received the therapy in 2007, a 68 percent increase from 2002. This is a may cause for concern among cardiologists, as the treatment is expensive, time consuming, and has yet to be proven. So naturally, an intensive study soon followed.

Researchers found that chelation patients' heart attack rate was 6 percent, compared to 8 percent for those who received the placebo treatment.  The study also found that 15 percent of chelation patients required coronary artery surgery, compared to the 18 percent of placebo patients. The results may seem miniscule, but it's still enough to catch cardiologists' attention.

"I can't overemphasize how unexpected these results were," said Dr. Gervasio Lamas, the cardiologist from University of Columbia who led the study. Other cardiologists, like Nissen, still have their doubts. Nissen cited how many patients dropped out of the trial and added that some were treated with unproven methods in alternative medicine centers.

"How do you get good research done at places like that?" Nissen said. "I think you don't."

Although the results remain disputed, the study is a promising step in the right direction for chelation therapy. Future studies will need to be performed in order to prepare the treatment for mainstream medical practice, but at least it has cardiologists' attention.