testing

[meaat]

Have been having shortness of breath. Family PH suggested echocardiogram. The test was read by my cardiologist and was told my ejection fraction was significantly reduced. Had no explanation for the low number 35%. Cardiologist felt he needed to get to the bottom of things and had me do a persantin stress test four days later. The stress test showed an ejection fraction of 61%. My cadiologist had no explanation for the low echo results. He was very upbeat and cheery about the stress results and told me the stress test is the most accurate to determine heart health and output. Is he right??

[vrao]

ed34 is correct. meaat need to ask question to the doctor.

[ed34]

You are missing the whole point here I think. We are saying what happens when you are given no explanation. Yes we can provide internet sources, but wiki isn't the most reliable in my eyes, and find answers but it's when a Doctor doesn't provide you with one that the worry creeps in. You say you didn't care? but maybe it's because you already had some knowledge of such things. Most people don't even know the heart has four chambers, and they need explanations to keep their sanity.

[curmudgen]

and yet another site for information - different tests not a surprise especially with different techniques - all within normal range .... read  this -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ejection_fraction

[curmudgen]

from a simple search  ejection fraction and the mayo clinic site -

...."Because the left ventricle is the heart's main pumping chamber, ejection fraction is usually measured only in the left ventricle (LV). A normal LV ejection fraction is 55 to 70 percent. ...."

[Occupant]

"and I don't see the concern that some numbers don't match up between the two"
Even to that you have to say, it all depends. When I read my report, Electocardiogram said LVEF est. 55%. Nuclear Stress test says LVEF est. 74%. You can see the numbers are pretty far apart, but I really didn't give a damn.

[bubbaben]

I certainly would agree with ed  thats like having 2 test for cancer with one saying you have it and one saying you dont....If the test are that far apart and only one is truly accurate where are we really going with medicine...I would be extremely concerned

[ed34]

"and I don't see the concern that some numbers don't match up between the two"
So you wouldn't be the slightest bit concerned that one report is basically saying you are on the verge of heart failure, while the other says you are normal? come on :)  I think any human being would be asking questions.

[curmudgen]

As I understand it an echo looks at the structure of the heart/valves and dynamics of wall movement and blood flow through the heart while a nuclear stress test monitors the electrical activity and blood flow within the heart muscle itself.  Two complementary tests each with its own set of values..... As patients we tend to see more in these reports than there actually is...we have to rely on the professional reading of results and I don't see the concern that some numbers don't match up between the two  or even with the same test done twice.  That said,  the stress test probably is the more important test from the stand point of examining  heart electrophysiology.

[ed34]

I believe it's becoming the general consensus among cardiologists. I had an echo before my 2 recent stents and when I asked my cardiologist what the results were, he said "erm, well, they are not reliable, a stress test gives far more accuracy". Having said that of course I am now thinking things like "Why did he order one then, is there anything abnormal on it".