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? Is there a good publication for lay people that I can read that might shed more light on this question?
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.
Have the angiogram because it is low risk and will give a great view of your arteries. During the same procedure, if possible, they can also fix a blockage if one exists. I would emphasise that you want the catheter put into your arm rather than your leg because there is then no risk of bleeding or infection.
People can have an reaction to the nuclear stress test. The test is not perfect. The only true test, which is a procedure, is the angiogram. My mom had the nuclear stress test and was told that it was not bad and a few months later she was totally plugged in two main arteries and about 99 percent plugged in the other. Have you had an echocardiogram yet? An echocardiogram can check the heart valves.
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.
What test determined your EF factor? An Echo and stress test is pretty accurate, but a stress test is just an approximation. You will know a lot more about your heart health after the procedure, they will determine your EF factor during the Angiogram. Your heart arteries will be mapped, any abnormalities noted.
I have advanced CAD, and have for close to fifteen years. I wasn't very careful with my health until fifteen years ago.
If you want my truthful opinion, I would go for the angiogram. This is because of two things. First the there are risks, but driving a car carries risks, as does crossing the road. Life is full of risk. However, the risk for Angiogram is tiny. Let's say you go for the CT-64 slice, which my Cardiologists have all hated, and they find that there is a blockage which warrants further investigation, you will still need an angiogram after.
They thought my stress test from Indonesia was abnormal. They did an ECHO stress test and found some blockage in the back of my heart. They then requested me to do an Angiogram for them to see better in to my heart. I did and I was sent home after 4 hours. They said I am OK. Thats all. I saw my cardios letter while I was with my own GP.
To go from an ekg to angiogram seems unnecessary based on the information posted. A stress test is a less invasive procedure, and usually shows any occluded vessels. Why is that test avoided?
An angiogram can be with a cath (invasive...probe the coronary arteries) or an angiogram can be the Modern CT angiograms that uses multiple detectors to capture images from different rotations of the CT scanner.
Are you in the high risk category?
***In CT scan angiogram (non-interventioanal procedure) the imaging is critical because, in our practice, if plaque is present over and above the normal amount for your age, we would offer you “long term management” with intensive measures. Sometimes this involves lifestyle and medication to slow down the progression of plaque. We also recheck your plaque load over time to make sure you are on track.**** Medication can be the appropriate therapy.
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.
I have had an ECG stress test and a Myoview scan, both of which have shown an abnormal result. I now have to decide whether to have an angiogram but am worried about the risks involved. My cardiologist doesn't seem to think that any problems I have are too severe and that in fact there's a chance that both tests could be giving false positive results. I wondered whether cardiac MRI or cardiac computed tomography are a viable alternative to an angiogram ? Any advice would be appreciated.
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.
hey my dad is suppose to go in for an angiogram but he fears what might happen to him if he does. i was wondering if there was possible any alternative procedure or something else he could possibly do.
A calcium score can help RISK stratify you for major cardiac events over the long term, but it DOES not tell you specifics about the extent of your current blockages. A CT angiogram or a cath angiogram can do that--cath is still the gold standard.
Recommendations for asymptomatic individuals based on their coronary calcium sore can be summarized as follows. Calcium scores of 0 identify individuals in the "lowest-risk" group with 10 year risk for cardiac events less than 5%.
I erred, I meant you should have a stress test in a year or so.
My blockages have always occurred in a short period of time, and I wish I had followed orders years ago to have an annual stress test.
However, until the blockage reaches the critical size (70% or greater), no cardiologist will offer that. This is because the risk of the blockage must exceed the risk of a procedure before action is taken. A CT scan isn't the best scan to have for the artery, an Angiogram is the gold standard. I know people who were told they had mild stenosis in an artery, but an angiogram revealed a worse situation. There is also blood flow rate to consider.
Thanks for the info. An angiogram has been suggested more then likely I will have the proceedure, As someone said keeping still for several hours is the hardest part. My results were from a stress test,which I was able to do physically without pain, at the end I was out of breath but not breathing laboriously. If I could resolve this problem without surgery I would. Can that happen? Thru excercise and diet?
Recommended
