Muga

[MissaBaby]

Ok, I got the results of the ECHO I had with my GP from 2 weeks ago. Apparently the pictures were of poor quality and they can't read anything. So he wants a MUGA. Since my cardio's echo showed an EF of 50%, do I really need this MUGA? I hate anything with needles!!!!!

[JAMESFETT]

I wonder what part of the echo was not clear? Apparently the EF of 50 percent was clear enough, and that is by far the most important element. For followup purposes on each repeat echo in PPCM the EDD and EF are the most important, quickly obtained, and reliable. I don't worry about not having MUGA re-confirmations on follow-ups. If the EF was clearly established on the echo, and you are doing so well, it is sufficient to keep on course and repeat the echo in 3 to 6 months. When one cannot obtain an adequate "window" from the echo device placed on the chest, then MUGA's have more indication. Otherwise they are expensive technology to obtain similar information.

James

[MissaBaby]

Sorry, I was unclear. Two weeks ago I took an Echo at the request of my GP. The results didn't come in, so my cardiologist did his own echo on the 3rd. That's how I found the EF of 50%. The GP just called me today to say the results of the echo I two weeks ago cannot be read because of poor quality, so that GP doctor wants a MUGA.

[JAMESFETT]

Then, I think your cardiologist's echo is reassuring and adequate. The office echo is highly reliable, done by a reliable cardiologist, the results can be duplicated within 2 or 3 points. Your option is certainly reasonable to live with that report, continue your good treatment, repeat an echo in 3 to 6 months if everything continues fine.

James