should I get a angiogram?

[singularity]

hey all,

  For the last 10, 15 yeas of my life I have experienced chest pains, numbness of the left side of the body, nausea, gastrointestinal problems, severe fatigue etc. They have done many EKGs, stress testings but found nothing. My doctors are reluctant to do a Angiogram due to the risk. They feel that it is not likely for me to have a heart issue since if I did I probably wouldn't survived for so long.

  But for me, all my symptoms points towards a heart problem. I can't do anything physical for too long without feeling fatigued and I have constant chest discomfort. I think Angiogram is the only way to know for sure so I want to convince them to let me have one. Any suggestions?

  Thanks!

[ed34]

Personally singularity, I think you are wise. We all get fed up having test after test and still not knowing what the problem is.

[kenkeith]

Singularity, there is another option: The ct scan 256 slice is able to provide a reliable angiogram with very little risk of exposure.  It is more inclusive as it also provides images of the pulmonary system and the descending aorta.  Some people have an aneurysm of the descending aorta and don't know until there is a rupture that is often fatal.  

My ct scan showed atectasis (scarring) of the left lower lobe.  I know I abused my pulmonary system for years and the result is unexpected and no surprise.  Doesn't cause any symptoms...

[erijon]

Lest you think the risk is low enough to ignore, let me tell you what happened to my Mother. I've told this story here before, about 4 years ago she went to the ER with chest pain that she wanted to get checked out. She had some abnormal activity on her EKG so they sent her to the cath lab. As soon as the cath entered her heart it went into v fib and she was just minutes from death. It took 9 shocks to get her rhythm back. Having said that, I would have one tomorrow if my doctor said I needed one but I would never volunteer for one until it was necessary. 1 - 3% risk of complication may not be much but it's 1 -3% higher than none.

I would certainly opt for a safer and less invasive procedure until it was necessary. As I said, a Nuclear Stress Tests has a specificity of 97% meaning that it will find CAD in an individual who has blocked arteries 97% of the time. I would also explore a CT Angiogram before I started letting a doctor thread a catheter up my leg into my heart.

Just my opinion, good luck on your decision.

Jon

[joanincarolina]

The non-invasive approachs should be tried first.A heart cath does carry risk and is NOT diagnostic for all heart problems.I know that first hand.I would suggest you head to a well known Heart Center for evaluation.You may not get an answer, but you'll find out what 'its' not.Because the doctors say you would not have survived if it was something with your heart is incorrect; if you read many entries here you know that there are not always answers and many of us are managing heart problems and have been for years, not all times in those years 'quality' times. Don't dismiss your signs.Joan.

[singularity]

Thank you for your support here guys. Very very helpful!

[ed34]

"ct scan 256 slice"

Is nobody using the new 320 slice scanners yet?