View Full Version : Echo vs. Muga

02-24-2010, 11:56 AM
I have had three MUGA tests and three ECHO tests over the past nine months in conjunction with my Stem Cell Procedure and calculations of my Ejection Fraction.. It seems odd that the Echo and Muga are in such a high degree of variance with the Echo always lower. The Muga is recognized as the more accurate of the two due to it's detail. In the past I have always had Echos as a means of reading my EF. It appears to me that Echos and their calculations may not offer something than a general idea of what your Ejection Fraction is. Accurate Ejection Fraction measurement is an important part of knowing the pimping factor of one's heart. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

02-24-2010, 07:11 PM
Buddy - I do not have heart disease, but I am frequently asked what my FEV1 is. This is a measurement of lung function. There are variables that can occur when one is tested. I have decided that I just can't worry about it other than getting tested about once a year to make sure my ship hasn't sunk. There are other numbers that one gets during a pulmonary function test and I can't say which measurement is the most important, but I do know the main emphasis is always on the FEV1.

I would think a decent cardiologist should be able to tell you what to put value in for the types of tests you take. Do you have one that you trust?

I doubt if this is much help to you, but bottom line, if you are feeling good and enjoying yourself, don't worry too much about numbers.

02-24-2010, 09:31 PM
Buddy - I am curious about your results with both tests. How much of a difference is there between them? Also, do you have any idea why there is a difference.

03-21-2010, 01:28 PM
Hi: Actually Ejection Fraction is a very important player in heart disease. It tells the amount of blood pumped out of a ventricle during heartbeat. It is a key evaluator in how well the heart is functioning. A normal heart should be in the range of 50-75, this keeps the major functions of the body, kidneys, lungs, liver, etc., in working order.
After my heart attack my EJ dropped down to 20 and practical medicine could not raise it beyond that level. My Cariodogist told me it would never go beyond 20 or 22. Dr. Grekos has a very detailed testing procedure at the Base line level and at the three month and six month level. He covers every aspect of my blood work, heart and other health issues in detail all done at his clinic.The variance between an Echo and a MUGA is difficult to explain. Although the Echo is mostly widelly used and is an imaging procedure that creates a graphic outline of the heart's movement using high-frequency sound waves. I believe it is the most widely used procedure to determine the heart's pumping action and detect valve abnormalities. It is much cheaper than a MUGA which entails mixing the blood with radioactive material that adhere to the blood cells and allow for detailed pictures of the heart and show those areas that are functioning and those that are not. The MUGA is generally accepted as a better indicator. I never had a MUGA prior to my stem cell adventure and I have had three with Regenocyte in addition to a Pet Scan and other first time tests. Expensive to be sure but all covered by my initial fee.
My Ejection fraction currently is at 35 (resting) and at 44 (exercise) through MUGA. My Echo shows at leeast a five to 10 point variance (lower) than the MUGA and this has been the case of others whom I have talked with. I tend not to have a great deal of faith in the Echo with regard to an accurate reading of Ejection Fraction. I always ask for copies of all tests I have and go over some of them with my cardiologist. Still, the definitive answer of the variance between the two tests eludes me.