Enlarged Heart
Discussion
NDA said:
daz3210 said:
Its not an ECG that I am being sent for, that has already been done.
This the doctor described as being like an ultrasound that the do for babies in a pregnant lady but on my heart.
He said hopefully it will be done in the department where he works then he can pull the result to get it reported quicker.
An ECG is an EchoCardioGram..... Ultrasound. This the doctor described as being like an ultrasound that the do for babies in a pregnant lady but on my heart.
He said hopefully it will be done in the department where he works then he can pull the result to get it reported quicker.
I had the one where they put loads of stickers on your body and get a printed trace. I thought that was an ECG.
Now I have to go for an ultrasound thing, which I thought the doc called an echocardiagram. Have I got one of the names wrong?
daz3210 said:
I'm getting confused now.
I had the one where they put loads of stickers on your body and get a printed trace. I thought that was an ECG.
Now I have to go for an ultrasound thing, which I thought the doc called an echocardiagram. Have I got one of the names wrong?
You're right, NDA is wrong. I had the one where they put loads of stickers on your body and get a printed trace. I thought that was an ECG.
Now I have to go for an ultrasound thing, which I thought the doc called an echocardiagram. Have I got one of the names wrong?
It stands for ElectroCardioGraphy
HTH.
Edited by KardioKate on Monday 23 April 16:47
Quick video here gives a look at ECG vs Echocardiogram. http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/17737912
It should take 20-30 mins and be performed by a Cardiac Physiologist, a similar professional group to Radiographers but they do cardiac and/or respiratory investigations only.
As I said before, wait this one out and once all the results are back things will be clearer. I'd be reassured that your GP has links with the Cardiology dept at Pinderfields so is likely to be more in tune than some....
It should take 20-30 mins and be performed by a Cardiac Physiologist, a similar professional group to Radiographers but they do cardiac and/or respiratory investigations only.
As I said before, wait this one out and once all the results are back things will be clearer. I'd be reassured that your GP has links with the Cardiology dept at Pinderfields so is likely to be more in tune than some....
Qualified in what though? ;-)
There's plenty of fully qualified Cardiologists who couldn't find the on switch on an ultrasound scanner never mind generate some decent quality images!
What you'll most likely find is that the Physiologist, will do the scan and write up a 'technical' report, i.e. facts only, chamber dimensions, wall thicknesses, blood velocities etc. They're highly trained and undergo regular audit and re-assessment. Depending on the hospital policy they may discuss whether findings are within normal limits but probably won't be in a position to discuss what that might mean for you. It'll then be up to either a Consultant Cardiologist or your GP to make clinical recommendations with regard to any treatment once armed with all the results and knowledge of your clinical history (think of each test or bit of information as a jigsaw piece).
I'm not convinced that seeing a Consultant Cardiologist would guarantee better or different care and almost certainly you'd have to wait a lot longer unless paying. It might well be that you do end up with a referral to one after the tests, but at least then they'll have the results before you see them rather than waiting for an initial appointment, waiting for tests then waiting for another appointment.....
Hope all goes well, any idea on the wait for a scan?
ps There's about a 75% chance it'll be a she.
There's plenty of fully qualified Cardiologists who couldn't find the on switch on an ultrasound scanner never mind generate some decent quality images!
What you'll most likely find is that the Physiologist, will do the scan and write up a 'technical' report, i.e. facts only, chamber dimensions, wall thicknesses, blood velocities etc. They're highly trained and undergo regular audit and re-assessment. Depending on the hospital policy they may discuss whether findings are within normal limits but probably won't be in a position to discuss what that might mean for you. It'll then be up to either a Consultant Cardiologist or your GP to make clinical recommendations with regard to any treatment once armed with all the results and knowledge of your clinical history (think of each test or bit of information as a jigsaw piece).
I'm not convinced that seeing a Consultant Cardiologist would guarantee better or different care and almost certainly you'd have to wait a lot longer unless paying. It might well be that you do end up with a referral to one after the tests, but at least then they'll have the results before you see them rather than waiting for an initial appointment, waiting for tests then waiting for another appointment.....
Hope all goes well, any idea on the wait for a scan?
ps There's about a 75% chance it'll be a she.
OK, yes fair enough. I think for a non complex case anyone, (Consultant, Registrar, Specialist interest GP etc.) would be following standard best practice guidelines though and there'd be no variation in treatment. If there's any question or doubt that your case is anything different your GP will be discussing it with one of the Cardiologists.
Deliveredenergy said:
OK, yes fair enough. I think for a non complex case anyone, (Consultant, Registrar, Specialist interest GP etc.) would be following standard best practice guidelines though and there'd be no variation in treatment. If there's any question or doubt that your case is anything different your GP will be discussing it with one of the Cardiologists.
Which I guess he will have easy (or easier) access to.OK
Just a quick update.
The ECG came back with what the doc said was nothing to worry about, except there is indication that my heart is under strain. The heartbeat pattern etc he said was perfectly healthy.
As I sit typing I have a 24 hour blood pressure monitor on (which is a pain, cos I have to sit stock still when it does its bit).
I also have to have an Echo Cardiogram, which is booked for the end of the month. That the doc said will give a better picture than we have now.
The only thing is that the blood pressure thing gives me severe pain when it takes a reading on occasion. Is this any indication of anything much? The nurse that fitted it simply put it down to the fact the machine is effectively cutting off the blood to my arm temporarily.
Just a quick update.
The ECG came back with what the doc said was nothing to worry about, except there is indication that my heart is under strain. The heartbeat pattern etc he said was perfectly healthy.
As I sit typing I have a 24 hour blood pressure monitor on (which is a pain, cos I have to sit stock still when it does its bit).
I also have to have an Echo Cardiogram, which is booked for the end of the month. That the doc said will give a better picture than we have now.
The only thing is that the blood pressure thing gives me severe pain when it takes a reading on occasion. Is this any indication of anything much? The nurse that fitted it simply put it down to the fact the machine is effectively cutting off the blood to my arm temporarily.
daz3210 said:
Latest is I had the echo, and unofficially there is very little to worry about.
Apparently my heart is beating exactly how it should, and shows as a very fit heart, beating fairly slowly at rest (less than 60 beats per min).
The full report will take about 2 months to get to my doc!
Top stuff Apparently my heart is beating exactly how it should, and shows as a very fit heart, beating fairly slowly at rest (less than 60 beats per min).
The full report will take about 2 months to get to my doc!
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff