In 2007, the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology issued guidelines regarding a practice commonly followed by many doctors in treating heart attack survivors. Specifically, those organizations stated that a procedure to clear blocked arteries that had caused a heart attack more than 24 hours earlier should stop being performed, given strong evidence that it conferred no treatment benefit.

Several years later, the practice continues essentially unabated, and critics are stepping up to voice concerns that it constitutes medical error. Researchers express worries that the procedure continues to be commonly used in stable patients and despite the guidelines that recommend against it.

A recent medical study that analyzed the records of nearly 30,000 patient visits to U.S. hospitals for heart attacks found that more than half of those patient underwent the procedure. That percentage remained the same following a 2006 trial that concluded the procedure did not reduce the risk of subsequent heart problems. It did not change in 2007, either, after the guidelines recommending against it.

The procedure, in fact, "remains commonplace despite little evidence to support its use in stable patients and new clinical practices recommending against it," concludes the latest study.

It is notable that the procedure uses a stent sold by various American medical companies -- including Medtronic and Boston Scientific Corp. -- that assists in keeping an artery open. The researchers say that, in addition to the procedure being medically unnecessary, the use of a stent also adds considerably to its cost.

What bothers researchers the most, though, is that doctors simply don't seem to be paying much -- if virtually any -- attention to the results of a carefully conducted medical study and the recommended medical guidelines.

Related Resource: Bloomberg, "Guidelines Don't Curb Unnecessary Treatment for Heart Attack Patients" July 11, 2011