Abnormal EKG, Fairly Normal Stress & Ultrasound

[gailgo55]

During a routing physical, I had an abnormal EKG & was referred to a cardiologist. Cardiologist repeated EKG, which again was abnormal. He did an ultrasound (with contrast), then stress test, then another ultrasound. Went back yesterday to cardiologist, who at first, didn't seem overly concerned about the ultrasound & stress test.  Said heart wasn't 'relaxing' properly after each beat and MAY be a little hardening of arteries (which he did say was a bit abnormal for a 55 y/o, but again, he didn't seem too concerned about either issue).  BUT.... when he again looked at the EKG's, whatever he saw didn't jive with the stress test & ultrasound. He now wants to do an angiogram and says he really has no idea of what's causing the EKG abnormalities. I'm 55 y/o, only slightly overweight, not a smoker or drinker, have VERY good blood pressure, pulse, oxygen saturation and cholesterol numbers. I did just recently have a nodule found on my thyroid (which had grown in size over the last couple of years, but is still considered small), which my regular doctor wants me to have checked out.  Also, recently I learned that I was extremely low on vitamin D, for which I'm taking supplements.  I had another EKG done about 3 years ago when I applied for life insurance and as far as I know, it was normal.  Any thoughts on what this might be?   Do you think the doctor is being prudent in wanting the angiogram (I have very good private isurance coverage).  Thank you for any input, Gail

[erijon]

I would opt for the angio, they are very safe and 100% accurate. The CT is good, but it can still leave a doubt as it is not as accurate. Why goes through all this twice. In addition, many insurance providers still will not pay for a cardiac CT for the reason above, so you should look into that.

Everyone I know that has experienced a angio has said it was no big deal, and they got more worked up than necessary. You'll be fine, I would want a 100% correct answer and be done with it.

Good luck,

Jon

[gailgo55]

I'd certainly prefer anything to an angiogram!  It really scares me (and I question if it's absolutely necessary.  Wouldn't the ultrasound (with and without dye) have shown the same info though as a CT scan would?

[curmudgen]

Just a comment about going for an angiogram....can you ask to do a high speed CT scan with contrast....this is a non-invasive procedure compared to an angiogram and except for a dye reaction certainly has less risk.  Provided almost as much information as angiogram. The CT scan can also give you a calcium score which may be helpful.