There is some variability in the interpretation of your test, as well as in the actual numbers quoted. Not having seen you study I can't say that I agree with this reading, and it is fairly atypical to have a focal wall motion abnormality in a distribution not supplied by a coronary artery. THe base of the heart has more fibrous tissue and if this is not taken into account then one may make the mistake of calling the wall motion abnormal when it is normal. However a calculated EF of 47% is not normal for a thalium stress test, but once again this is partly subjective on the part of the interpreter.
Remember that any test is not perfect and this test is very far from it. Dependog on your pre test probability of having CAD you may then want to proceed to a cath or PET scan to better view any fixed deffects or viable tissue.