Q. Have you ever heard of chelation therapy to cure hardening of the arteries? My sister swears it is something I should look into, but I have some doubts.
A. I must tell you that there is a great deal of emotional controversy about the procedure.
Chelation is a procedure by which a metal (such as lead) is “bound” to a chemical compound, which permits its removal from the body. This method is used in treating individuals with such conditions as lead poisoning.
But your question involves the use of an artificial amino acid called disodium edetate (EDTA) in an intravenous injection as an attempt to remove unwanted mineral deposits from various parts of the body, in particular the arteries. The material then exits the body through the kidneys.
Some promoters of this technique allege it to be helpful for many other conditions as well: kidney disease, emphysema, multiple sclerosis, gangrene, psoriasis and heart disease. Because of the claims about heart disease, it is often touted as an alternative to coronary artery bypass surgery.
The course of treatment may include as many as 20 to 50 sessions at about $85 per session, involving considerable cost. The problem is that the therapy remains unproven.
The available literature on the process was reviewed by the Task Force on New and Unestablished Therapies of the American Heart Association. They concluded that there was no scientific evidence to demonstrate any benefits and that there had been no adequate trials using currently approved scientific methods to prove the worth of chelation therapy.
Not many practitioners offer this treatment. Those who do contend the medical institution is withholding evidence of its effectiveness. But if there is such reliable data, I can’t find it.
A recent study performed in Denmark on patients with peripheral vascular disease of the legs (usually caused by atherosclerosis), found the therapy to be no more effective than a placebo.
ACROSS MY DESK
Two studies published in a recent edition of The American Journal of Public Health support one of my strong views about the importance of continued care with medical providers.
One study, from the Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, by Linda J. Weiss and Jan Blustein, analyzed data from 8,068 senior citizens over the age of 65. The researchers determined that patients who had a longstanding relationship with a medical care provider were less likely to be hospitalized and had lower annual Medicare costs, compared with patients who had relationships that were less than one year.
In another study from Harvard Medical School, Louise Ettner, Ph.D., reviewed the records of 17,110 children and 23,488 women and found that those with regular medical care providers, either doctors or clinics, were more likely to receive routine medical care, including some preventive measures.
