Which is better for a Heart Scan; Ultra Sound or Electron Beam Tomography (EBT or EBCT) technology?

Question

This is not paid for by insurance and the ultra sound is about half the cost of mechanical CT scanners or Electron Beam Tomography (EBT or EBCT) technology which they claim is the best. Which has the best chance of finding cardiovascular disease

Answer 1

Ronald,

That depends, on just what kind of heart disease you are looking for. Each of those technologies can see something different.

You haven't said anything about your age or if your doctor has suggested any of these test, if you're curious, worried, or if you've been having symptoms. The test yoiu select depends on all these factors, plus whatever someone thinks you might be at risk for.

The ultrasound scan, also known as an echocardiogram, looks at the heart as it works. It can take pictures of the heart, yes, but it is a test of the actual function (as opposed to the state) of the heart.

With an echocardiogram, one can see the valves work, the heart pump, the size of the heart, the flow, speed, and turbulence of the blood in the heart as it works. thus, if you've had an ekg, and it seems to indicate a left-side enlargement, for example, an echocardiogram would be the logical next step. It also good at detecting valve leaking or stenosis. You can detect some heardening of the arteries by the "sniff" test (the tech will ask you to sniff), but it's not exactly precise because the same effects as this test looks for can be caused by hypertension.

There is one sonogram-type test that can see the hardened arteries, but it requires an operating room and a surgeon to insert an ultrasound catheter into an artery. It's pretty specific and localized. Normally, some evidence of a hardened artery has to be seen by another test before they do this one.

If, however, you are worried about coronary artery disease and need a wide-area test to see all the arteries at once, while an echocardiogram can find some of it, if you're wondering about atherosclerosis, the calcified fatty plaques in arteries that cause--eventually--heart attacks, then the EBCT will pick those up much more clearly and quickly. It doesn't show the movement and actual working of the heart, but it's very good at detecting hardened vessels.

A CT scan can do the same thing as the EBCT, but it is much slower--about ten times slower.

I am sorry that there is no definitive answer to your question, but it really does "depend."

Can you ask your question with a little more detail?

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

To determine if you have heart disease, the first step is getting an EKG or electrocardiogram. This is a simple tracing of your heart's electrical pattern.

After that the next step is usually a stress test. In this test, you are placed on a treadmill and your heart's electrical activity is monitored or your heart is examined by an ultrasound to see if it is functioning properly. If you cannot tolerate a treadmill, a specific medication is given to you to stimulate the heart and simulate the increased work that the heart is doing when on the treadmill. If the heart is not getting enough blood to meet the demand, then parts of the heart will not beat properly depending on which coronary artery is involved. This will show up as abnormalities on the EKG or part of the heart is not contracting properly on the ultrasound.

A nuclear stress test can also be done. In this test, radioactive tracers are injected into your body - they will flow with blood. If there are blockages in certain of the coronary arteries, less of the tracers are seen in that artery. They do this before and after you are stressed (exercise or through medication) to determine if there is a change.

Finally, you can go for a cardiac catheterization. In this procedure, you are given an intravenous dye through a catheter that is usually inserted in the femoral artery in your groin and fed back through the aorta to where the coronary arteries branch off. The dye will flow with blood through the arteries, but will not if the vessel is blocked off. A continuous X-ray device called fluoroscope is used to visualize the dye.

EBCT is a relatively new development and not standard yet.

Each procedure has is risks and benefits. For example a simple EKG or ultrasound may not be that accurate, while a cath would have a very high diagnostic sensitivity for heart disease (no contrast flowing through blocked off arteries), it is invasive (catheter through the groin) and involves the administration of IV contrast which some people are allergic to and may cause problems with the kidneys. However, everything depends on the risks and benefits of the situation. A 60yo man, with hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, is a smoker and has a family history of heart attacks and is presenting with chest pain likely needs to be cathed as opposed to just getting a stress test.

Answer 4

neither, both have a long lasting effect of radiation. check out www.emfscience.net for more info on this.