According to the findings by the scientists of the Duke University Medical Center in North Carolina, treating some cases of heart attacks with drugs is just as effective, and far more economical, than to insert a stent into a clogged artery.

The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, stated that by and large there was hardly any long-term benefit accruing to patients who have stents inserted in their clogged arteries, vis-a-vis those who were administered drugs and non-surgical treatment.

Though wire mesh stents can help open blocked arteries if used some few hours before a heart attack, they are no more useful than clot-busting drugs after the patient has suffered an attack, because the heart muscles might have suffered irreversible damage.

If such be the case, for the nearly 1.2 million Americans who suffer heart attacks every year, the findings imply that they can save substantial stent surgery costs. On an average, forgoing stents could bring about a $7,000 saving per patient, thereby saving $700 million surgery costs for the estimated 100,000 US heart attack patients, who can do without the surgery.

Lead researcher Dr. Daniel Mark said the study comes to a "comprehensive" conclusion that, in some heart attack cases, "the benefit of stenting is very small and it's not worth the extra cost of doing the procedure."