CT scan 64-slice angiogram as well as a cath angiogram is by definition an angiogram as both involve a dye injection, but there is more intense radiation exposure with CT angiogram. It is fast becoming the radiological test of choice to look at disease of blood vessels. The next generation of a ct scan will reduce the individual's radiation exposure.
The ct angiogram involves an assessment of the body of the vessels as well as the lumen.
You better check with your doctors, I am not sure about the potential damage due to the radiation dose that you will take during the procedure.
Also if they discover blockages in your coronaries, I do not know about the risk of the medication that you will need.
As an example, my nuclear scan showed excellent results, but I had already had an angiogram. My angiogram showed a completely blocked LAD and a blockage in my LCx. My right artery was also totally blocked halfway down. Collateral vessels played a huge role. The amount of radiation used is not that high and risks are low.
I saw a new cardiologist at a different hospital and he thinks I should have a CT Angiogram.. A CT Angiogram is a none invasive procedure, it takes 3d pictures of the heart using a ct scane 64 slice method. The scane can pic up blocked blood flow and narrow blood vessels.. But I would like to know witch one of the two is more reliable test.. Considering I had a negative nuclear stress test.. Will the ct angiogram be a more persised test at pinpointing and finding a possible problem..
Hi, I wanted to find out how much radiation is involved in a traditional angiogram. I've had multiple nuclear tests done in the last 10 years with two nuclear stress tests within the last three. I continue to get chest pain in heat and with exertion and am convinced that I should push my doctors for a traditional angio. Wanted to find out how much radiation dosage is involved in that.
What are the risks involved in getting that test? I'm a 40 year old female.
has ordered is a CT angiogram to check arteries, etc. I am very worried about the exposure of radiation that this test gives off.
I also had a CTA of the Aortic Arch and Head back in 2009 when my doctor was worried about a carotid bruit that he kept hearing in my right neck. That test proved ok and it was determined that the bruit was coming from my mitral valve regurgitation that was radiating sound up to the carotids.
I have a history of high cholesterol and am currently on a cholesterol reducing medication as well as a medication to reduce blood pressure. I was offered several options as the next step and opted for a CT angiogram. Given my other results, should I have gone directly to the more conventional angiogram in spite of the slightly greater risk? If there is a good chance that I will need an angiogram anyway, am I not putting myself at risk by going through another step?
doctor asked to take an angiogram .is there anything to fear ,since father says he doesnt feel any fatigue or breathlesness .but sometimes after 1 month he says he is feeling little brethless sometime .please clarify me about the nature of disease.
I have had a angiogram 10 years ago and everything was clear, no blockages anywhere. Now, there is slight angina more often than it used to seem to occur, but when I excercise, nothing hurts, all is well. Blood tests are all OK, but the physician suggested the CT scan.
If the danger of radiation caused cancers was significant, nobody would be tested. Can you have a CT done every month? Of course not. A CT--even with the very slight risk of cancer--is safer than an angiogram. Angiograms are very safe, but not without risk.
The CT is noninvasive, and it would give you either information that you are developing heart disease, or it would give you piece of mind that you are not. Either answer would be useful to you.
A nuclear stress test is about 85% accurate in finding CAD whereas a angiogram is 100% accurate. The angiogram also carries a 1 - 3% risk of complications, the most common risk, although very rare, is having an artery dissected during the procedure which results in emergency bypass surgery. Having said that, if I was told I needed one I would do it without hesitation. It is the gold standard of heart tests to determine if CAD is present.
In the past year I have had a 64 ct angiogram and several chest ct scans.do you think this radiation is excessive and may lead to future health problems?
thanks,
dimi.
CT angiograms will expose you to a small amount of radiation. If you have known coronary artery disease, a traditional coronary angiogram may be a better option, since you can also receive treatment for your artery blockages during a traditional coronary angiogram. Since you are symptomatic but do not have known coronary artery disease, you can go ahead with the CT scan, based on these findings further therapy can be planned. Regards.
Many cardiologists seem to prefer angiogram. I've had both a ct angio and an angiogram and I didn't feel any difference between the two. I still had the same burning sensations from the dye etc in both procedures. I did look at the images from both scans and the angiogram shows everything in real time, actually working. You see the blood flowing, you see the heart pumping and you see the reactions of the arteries. With the ct angio all I saw was a set of still pictures.
First, there is a risk with all CT scans associated with radiation exposure. A calcium score uses relatively little radiation, but the radiation dose may be considerable if combined with a CT-Angiogram. Secondly, there has not been any large study proving that patients treated based on calcium scores have better outcomes. A calcium score may also lead to unnecessary procedures that also have risks.
He told me that the next test he would order for me would be a ct angiogram (which involves radiation). My question is I definitely want a sure answer to my symptoms, however do not want to go through more radiation. Would an MRA (magnetic resonance angiogram) be able to detect Coronary Artery Disease? Should I request an MRA rather than a CT angio, or should I be going with the cath?
Invasive catheterization can lead to mechanically induced spasm of coronary arteries, but that may history with the advancement of CT multi sliced scan angiogram (low risk of radiation). There is medical documentation where catheter induced coronary spasm was uncovered with a CT angiogram. From what I have read it is not unusual to unintentionly induce a spasm with a cath, and if so how does a doctor differentiate?
"I'm 24 yr old male with left side chest pain, radiating to left arm and left jaw with high cholesterol. Normal stress echo, echo, blood work, holter monitor, ekgs, and event monitor besides PVC's and SVT. They want me to have a 64 slice ct angiogram tomorrow and I just had a 64 slice heart CT for heart calcium scoring, which was negative. My questions are is 1.
"I'm 24 yr old male with left side chest pain, radiating to left arm and left jaw with high cholesterol. Normal stress echo, echo, blood work, holter monitor, ekgs, and event monitor besides PVC's and SVT. They want me to have a 64 slice ct angiogram tomorrow and I just had a 64 slice heart CT for heart calcium scoring, which was negative. My questions are is 1.
The downside is there may a cancer risk from the radiation. The CT angiogram is not recommended for a younger individual, but an older individual does not have the same risk for cancer and also it takes about 10 years for any adverse affects, if there is to be any.
I recently had a ct angiogram and the exam includes the respiratory system and the complete aorta configuration.
Recommended
