Variability in echos
Variability in echos
I had several "false alarms" that surgery was imminent due to echo readings. I've been getting echos every 6 mos-1 yr, and every once in a while the left ventricle reading would jump up. Then I'd go back in 3 mos later, and it was back to where it was before.
Finally after going through these Chinese fire drills, I asked my cardiologist if we might be seeing variations about the mean. His eyes popped wide and admitted that yes, that might be the case. The point there is that there is inherent variability in the reading due to the subjective nature of the technique and patient-related factors. Then I asked him what the overall change has been for the last 10 years - it was negligible. Then he graphed the results and a slow, upward trend was observed, but with a lot of "noise" in the readings.
I do trust the echos, but within the technique's capabilities. They measure edges of a beating heart, and are subject to variability in the patient's heart dimensions from day to day.
Turned out finally the symptoms triggered the surgery, not the echos, although I did have 2 readings on the high end in a row, so there's something to it after all.
I say get a repeat, especially if there's surgery depending on the outcome. An echo costs about a thousand (at least here in Chicago), surgery a lot more, etc. I also think the decision for surgery should be made using several factors.
Patty
Variability in echos
I had several "false alarms" that surgery was imminent due to echo readings. I've been getting echos every 6 mos-1 yr, and every once in a while the left ventricle reading would jump up. Then I'd go back in 3 mos later, and it was back to where it was before.
Finally after going through these Chinese fire drills, I asked my cardiologist if we might be seeing variations about the mean. His eyes popped wide and admitted that yes, that might be the case. The point there is that there is inherent variability in the reading due to the subjective nature of the technique and patient-related factors. Then I asked him what the overall change has been for the last 10 years - it was negligible. Then he graphed the results and a slow, upward trend was observed, but with a lot of "noise" in the readings.
I do trust the echos, but within the technique's capabilities. They measure edges of a beating heart, and are subject to variability in the patient's heart dimensions from day to day.
Turned out finally the symptoms triggered the surgery, not the echos, although I did have 2 readings on the high end in a row, so there's something to it after all.
I say get a repeat, especially if there's surgery depending on the outcome. An echo costs about a thousand (at least here in Chicago), surgery a lot more, etc. I also think the decision for surgery should be made using several factors.
Patty
