river-wear
Well-known member
Hi,
I finally got some of my echo results from my former cardiologist. I asked for everything they had and got three years. Sigh. Probably doesn't matter anyway, huh? Funny how relatively little things can be so upsetting when your health is involved.
Anyway, even though these are older results from 10/06 (haven't rounded up the 2008 & 2009 records yet), I was hoping you kind folks could help me figure out what numbers I should be looking at. Oh, and one other surprise - my AV is "probably bicuspid." 38 years and never once did I hear a doctor say that (although I guess I wouldn't have understood in the first ten or so).
The echo reports have long lists of statistics under the headings 2D, M-Mode and Doppler. Two items the doctor had a note next to were L VIDd (6.21cm) and L VIDs (4.10cm). I see what looks like ejection fraction (61.9%).
The summary says the regurgitant volume is 122ml and effective regurgitant orifice of 47mm2. One other comment has me wondering: "The aortic valve is mildly sclerosed but appears unrestricted to leaflet excursion with eccentric leaflet closure and is probably bicuspid. There is diastolic fluttering of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. The anterior mitral valve leaflet is thickened and redundant with evidence for mild prolapse due to the aortic insufficiency jet."
Thoughts? Are there other numbers I should be looking for when I get my newer results? The 2006 report says the aortic insufficiency increased but my doctor never said there was any change, and the "new" doctor hasn't seen any of my history even though I asked them to get my records transferred over a year ago. I'm considering getting the new test results and starting over with another doctor that (hopefully) I can trust. I'm really, really missing my old doc in Michigan now!
Michele
I finally got some of my echo results from my former cardiologist. I asked for everything they had and got three years. Sigh. Probably doesn't matter anyway, huh? Funny how relatively little things can be so upsetting when your health is involved.
Anyway, even though these are older results from 10/06 (haven't rounded up the 2008 & 2009 records yet), I was hoping you kind folks could help me figure out what numbers I should be looking at. Oh, and one other surprise - my AV is "probably bicuspid." 38 years and never once did I hear a doctor say that (although I guess I wouldn't have understood in the first ten or so).
The echo reports have long lists of statistics under the headings 2D, M-Mode and Doppler. Two items the doctor had a note next to were L VIDd (6.21cm) and L VIDs (4.10cm). I see what looks like ejection fraction (61.9%).
The summary says the regurgitant volume is 122ml and effective regurgitant orifice of 47mm2. One other comment has me wondering: "The aortic valve is mildly sclerosed but appears unrestricted to leaflet excursion with eccentric leaflet closure and is probably bicuspid. There is diastolic fluttering of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. The anterior mitral valve leaflet is thickened and redundant with evidence for mild prolapse due to the aortic insufficiency jet."
Thoughts? Are there other numbers I should be looking for when I get my newer results? The 2006 report says the aortic insufficiency increased but my doctor never said there was any change, and the "new" doctor hasn't seen any of my history even though I asked them to get my records transferred over a year ago. I'm considering getting the new test results and starting over with another doctor that (hopefully) I can trust. I'm really, really missing my old doc in Michigan now!
Michele