Is it best to have an angiogram to check for blockages, but as they are inserting stents if needed, would I be better having a CT first to check for blockages
Angiogram or CT : Is it best to have an... - British Heart Fou...
Angiogram or CT
I think you are best guided by your cardiologist as you have multiple heart conditions which may affect the route map!
You're probably right. Seeing the Cardiology nurse for a pre-assessment so I could clarify then. Thank you
With an angiogram they check for blockages and, usually, stent if appropriate. Each procedure carries a very small amount of risk. Both have a risk of mainly kidney damage or allergic reaction to the dye used, and entering via an artery for an angiogram.
It all started with me feeling dizzy in March which led to blood tests, ecg and then a 24-hr ecg, then an echocardiogram which showed the severe pump impairment with an EF of 30-35%, very tired all the time. I ended up seeing a private doctor because they said I'd have to wait until September but felt so unwell and I'm the main carer for my son who is disabled so didn't want to wait. But I'm now in the NHS system following the echo as it was felt more urgent. It's very scary isn't it. Glad it made you feel much better, and you carry on feeling much better. X
Thank you, I hope so too x
Cardiac CT scans are of limited usage. Whilst they will show obvious blockages of major arteries and give an indication of the flow to the heart as a whole, they cannot show how blood is passing through the small artery branches.
Also, at an angiogram, they can insert devices along the wire that use ultrasound that can give your cardiologist an indication of the condition of the artery wall and they can even now use a tiny camera head on the wire during the Angiogram to actually see what is happening particularly if they decide to use one of the stimulants to induce a heart rate increase. All in all, the cardiologist will do what is right for you it’s not a case of a CT will produce the same results as it doesn’t 😀
Angiogram isn't sufficiently high resolution to indicate what's going on at the micro vessel level either. That's why diagnosis of coronary microvascular disease is so difficult.
I had a CT angio to hurry the process up as a long wait fo angiography. Consult said it wasn't clear on CT and I still had to wait for an angiography - 4 and half months
Exactly what BarneysDad said is what I was going to say...best of luck to you & be well!
I had an angiocram the week before I had another to put in the stents. Reason for that was because they didnt have a bed for me at that particular time. It was painless and all very interesting. Last week I had the angiocram but I had to be admitted which took hours and then the next day I had the angiocram and stent fitted, they then kept me on a monitor for 14 hours which checked my heart and circulation and then they took it off at about 10.30pm. I was released the next day at about 3pm after blood tests had been taken. Putting in the stent took less the an hour and it was mostly painless except a few funny feelings in the heart at times and also a hot feeling in my hand. Good luck with that. I was over the moon when I had mine, just trying to get back into my sleep rhythm as I spent months and months terrified to go to sleep in case I had a heart attack!!
I too had a CT scan first that indicated a slight blockage. Now booked in for an angiogram and stent if needed, but 12 weeks to wait.
Personally, I'd go straight for the angiogram. As my consultant calls it, it's the "gold standard". Additionally, I had a false negative result on a CT Angio giving a clear result, when in fact all 3 of my coronary arteries were restricted, resulting in 5 stents!