Question; Stress Thallium vs Stress Echo 
Author Message
 Question; Stress Thallium vs Stress Echo

I've been ordered to undergo a stress thallium test by my cardiologist
because of a slight abnormality that cropped up diring my treadmill
test. The nurse in the cardiac rehab program mentioned that a stress
echocardiogram would provide the same info with no injection of dye.

Other than the fact that the cardiologists practice has the equipment
for a stress thallium is there any reason to prefer one over the
other?

Thanks

Jon from Baltimore



Tue, 12 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT
 Question; Stress Thallium vs Stress Echo

Quote:

> I've been ordered to undergo a stress thallium test by my cardiologist
> because of a slight abnormality that cropped up diring my treadmill
> test. The nurse in the cardiac rehab program mentioned that a stress
> echocardiogram would provide the same info with no injection of dye.
> Other than the fact that the cardiologists practice has the equipment
> for a stress thallium is there any reason to prefer one over the
> other?

Well, let's think about this:  the stress thallium uses the principle that thallium is
injected just shortly before the end of the test and then your heart is scanned.  Muscle
receiving good {*filter*} supply "soaks" up the thallium and muscle that doesn't have good
{*filter*} supply doesn't.  Muscle area without good {*filter*} supply, therefore, shows up as a
"cold" spot on the scan.  

The stress echo shows an ultrasound picture of your heart post-exercise.  This shows areas
of heart muscle that are not contracting as well, along with other structures such as
valves.  

If one postulates that ischemic areas of the heart will NOT contract as well, then one
would presume that the stress echo would give the same data...but I'm not sure that is
true in a precise manner.  However, in general, you would get the same kind of
information.  I'd suggest that you discuss this matter with your doctor if you have more
precise questions about the test.  If the stress thallium is negative, then you can
presume that all areas of your heart are getting good {*filter*} flow, within the validity of
this test, which is pretty high (above 90% accuracy, as I recall.).  If the test results
end up being abnormal, you may be recommended for a heart catheterization.  

The one thing that I cannot answer that perhaps someone else with more knowledge could
address is this:  if a blockage is severe enough to impair {*filter*} flow to an area of the
heart, will that same area ALWAYS show up on the stress echo as impaired on contractility?
 I'd like to hear more discussion on this.

alvena
Alvena Ferreira

Homepage: http://www.***.com/
Fiance Visa Page: http://www.***.com/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why can't things just get back to normal, like it used to be?  When will
we stop these personal political abuses and get back to public political
abuses?



Tue, 12 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT
 Question; Stress Thallium vs Stress Echo
referring to the discussion  on stress thallium vs stress echo.

the thallium does NOT measure the amount of {*filter*} that the heart is
receiving. It is a measure of the {*filter*} flow to the heart.  Thus if all the
arteries to the heart are blocked  (as in my case) the results can be
textbook perfect.  This was the explaination I received when the angiogram
showed two arteries at more than 50% block and one at 90% blocked. My doctor
uses the mybistin (not sure of spelling) which sounds like a combination of
the radioisotop and echo .
sue

Quote:

>Well, let's think about this:  the stress thallium uses the principle that
thallium is
>injected just shortly before the end of the test and then your heart is
scanned.  Muscle
>receiving good {*filter*} supply "soaks" up the thallium and muscle that doesn't
have good
>{*filter*} supply doesn't.  Muscle area without good {*filter*} supply, therefore,
shows up as a
>"cold" spot on the scan.

>The stress echo shows an ultrasound picture of your heart post-exercise.
This shows areas
>of heart muscle that are not contracting as well, along with other
structures such as
>valves.

>If one postulates that ischemic areas of the heart will NOT contract as
well, then one
>would presume that the stress echo would give the same data...but I'm not
sure that is
>true in a precise manner.  However, in general, you would get the same kind
of
>information.  I'd suggest that you discuss this matter with your doctor if
you have more
>precise questions about the test.  If the stress thallium is negative, then
you can
>presume that all areas of your heart are getting good {*filter*} flow, within
the validity of
>this test, which is pretty high (above 90% accuracy, as I recall.).  If the
test results
>end up being abnormal, you may be recommended for a heart catheterization.

>The one thing that I cannot answer that perhaps someone else with more
knowledge could
>address is this:  if a blockage is severe enough to impair {*filter*} flow to an
area of the
>heart, will that same area ALWAYS show up on the stress echo as impaired on
contractility?
> I'd like to hear more discussion on this.



Thu, 14 Jun 2001 03:00:00 GMT
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Stress echo vs thallium stress test

2. Stress echo vs nuclear stress test

3. technetium vs thallium stress tests

4. CT Scan vs. Thallium Stress Test

5. Stress test: echo vs perfusion imaging

6. Question Thallium stress & perfussion

7. thallium stress test question

8. Stress echo result question

9. question about a stress-echo report (METS and CHF classification)

10. Rest/stress vs stress/rest

11. Stress Test/Thallium Scan

12. Thallium Stress Test


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software