If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
We just had our six month follow up echo for our cat who was diagnosed
with very mild HCM in May. I'm having trouble understanding the results and I hope you can shed some light while I wait to hear back from the cardiologist to clarify. Our cat was diagnosed with mild HCM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation, also mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. She had a grade 2 murmur. She has been on atenolol, 1/4 tablet twice a day which lowered heart rate to 140-150 (goal range) and eliminated the murmur. These latest echo results show no progression of the HCM, no SAM, no LVOT obstruction, no heart murmur. However, what I don't understand is that the cardiologist said the mitral valve is thicker (moderate now vs. mild) and there is still mild mitral regurgitation. I was told this is separate from the HCM. The conclusion was "Stable disease. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency. Recheck echo in one year." I'm having trouble understanding what is causing the mitral insufficiency if it isn't from HCM. My vet just said the cardiologist didn't explain it so he will have to talk to her. She did write "there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or any other cardiac size measurements" so I thought at first that meant nothing had gotten worse. I hope Phil reads this and can comment, or anyone else who has any ideas on what this means. I haven't been able to find anything about this kind of valve problem in cats. Thanks for any advice. -yngver |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
"yngver" wrote in message ... We just had our six month follow up echo for our cat who was diagnosed with very mild HCM in May. I'm having trouble understanding the results and I hope you can shed some light while I wait to hear back from the cardiologist to clarify. Our cat was diagnosed with mild HCM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation, also mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. She had a grade 2 murmur. She has been on atenolol, 1/4 tablet twice a day which lowered heart rate to 140-150 (goal range) and eliminated the murmur. These latest echo results show no progression of the HCM, no SAM, no LVOT obstruction, no heart murmur. However, what I don't understand is that the cardiologist said the mitral valve is thicker (moderate now vs. mild) and there is still mild mitral regurgitation. I was told this is separate from the HCM. The conclusion was "Stable disease. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency. Recheck echo in one year." I'm having trouble understanding what is causing the mitral insufficiency if it isn't from HCM. My vet just said the cardiologist didn't explain it so he will have to talk to her. She did write "there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or any other cardiac size measurements" so I thought at first that meant nothing had gotten worse. I hope Phil reads this and can comment, or anyone else who has any ideas on what this means. I haven't been able to find anything about this kind of valve problem in cats. Thanks for any advice. -yngver Mitral insufficiency can occur as a primary condition or secondary to HCM. Mitral insufficiency in cats is almost always caused by thickening of the valve leaflets which prevents the valve from closing properly. This allows blood to leak through the valve from the left ventricle to the left atrium during systole (regurgitation). Thickening of the valve leaflets can be independent of HCM and is usually caused by myxomatous degeneration (myxomatous atrioventricular valvular degeneration) which is usually progressive-- however, the rate of progression can be very slow. I don't know of any drug that slows the progression of mitral valve degeneration. I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. Best of luck, Phil |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
On Dec 7, 11:37 am, "Phil P." wrote:
"yngver" wrote in message ... We just had our six month follow up echo for our cat who was diagnosed with very mild HCM in May. I'm having trouble understanding the results and I hope you can shed some light while I wait to hear back from the cardiologist to clarify. Our cat was diagnosed with mild HCM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation, also mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. She had a grade 2 murmur. She has been on atenolol, 1/4 tablet twice a day which lowered heart rate to 140-150 (goal range) and eliminated the murmur. These latest echo results show no progression of the HCM, no SAM, no LVOT obstruction, no heart murmur. However, what I don't understand is that the cardiologist said the mitral valve is thicker (moderate now vs. mild) and there is still mild mitral regurgitation. I was told this is separate from the HCM. The conclusion was "Stable disease. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency. Recheck echo in one year." I'm having trouble understanding what is causing the mitral insufficiency if it isn't from HCM. My vet just said the cardiologist didn't explain it so he will have to talk to her. She did write "there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or any other cardiac size measurements" so I thought at first that meant nothing had gotten worse. I hope Phil reads this and can comment, or anyone else who has any ideas on what this means. I haven't been able to find anything about this kind of valve problem in cats. Thanks for any advice. -yngver Mitral insufficiency can occur as a primary condition or secondary to HCM. Mitral insufficiency in cats is almost always caused by thickening of the valve leaflets which prevents the valve from closing properly. This allows blood to leak through the valve from the left ventricle to the left atrium during systole (regurgitation). Thickening of the valve leaflets can be independent of HCM and is usually caused by myxomatous degeneration (myxomatous atrioventricular valvular degeneration) which is usually progressive-- however, the rate of progression can be very slow. I don't know of any drug that slows the progression of mitral valve degeneration. I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Since posting I did hear back from the cardiologist. She explained that whether the mitral valve leaflet is mildly or moderately thickened is just her visual impression at the moment and didn't necessarily mean anything had changed over time. She felt that whether the thickening is mild or moderate is insignificant. She said, just as you have, that the thickening could be an independent process or could be caused by the HCM, due to the outflow obstruction. She and my vet seemed to think that it's far more likely with a cat to be caused by HCM than independent valve disease. Myxomatous degeneration, as you mention, seems to also be called endocarditis and I couldn't find anything about it in cats, except that it's very rare or some sources say it is non-existent in cats. My vet says he's never seen a case of it in a cat. Do you know whether there is any way to tell whether the valve problem is caused by the HCM or not? The diagnosis of HCM is based on "LV size, wall thickness, and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS%, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-.62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. No SAM or LVOT obstruction." (initial echo showed mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction 50 mm Hg, now eliminated by the atenolol). If I understood correctly, my vet seemed to be saying that this bulge interferes with the function of the mitral valve and that could cause it to thicken. Does that sound plausible? The cardiologist said the important thing is that the report was good and the atenolol is improving heart function by decreasing the LVOT and secondary mitral regurgitation. This report gives MR Vmax and MR maxPG figures but those were not reported in the first echo so I can't see how much it's been reduced. This says MR Vmax 3.94 m/s. I realize I should probably just be happy that the HCM hasn't progressed but I'm a bit bewildered by the mention of the valve problem. The first report mentioned a thickened mitral valve leaflet and mild MR but it was presented to me as part of the HCM. This second report says "there is still mitral valve thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation" which almost sounds to me as though the cardiologist expected this to improve or disappear with the atenolol. I'm not sure why it would, however. Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
"yngver" wrote in message ... On Dec 7, 11:37 am, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message ... We just had our six month follow up echo for our cat who was diagnosed with very mild HCM in May. I'm having trouble understanding the results and I hope you can shed some light while I wait to hear back from the cardiologist to clarify. Our cat was diagnosed with mild HCM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation, also mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. She had a grade 2 murmur. She has been on atenolol, 1/4 tablet twice a day which lowered heart rate to 140-150 (goal range) and eliminated the murmur. These latest echo results show no progression of the HCM, no SAM, no LVOT obstruction, no heart murmur. However, what I don't understand is that the cardiologist said the mitral valve is thicker (moderate now vs. mild) and there is still mild mitral regurgitation. I was told this is separate from the HCM. The conclusion was "Stable disease. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency. Recheck echo in one year." I'm having trouble understanding what is causing the mitral insufficiency if it isn't from HCM. My vet just said the cardiologist didn't explain it so he will have to talk to her. She did write "there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or any other cardiac size measurements" so I thought at first that meant nothing had gotten worse. I hope Phil reads this and can comment, or anyone else who has any ideas on what this means. I haven't been able to find anything about this kind of valve problem in cats. Thanks for any advice. -yngver Mitral insufficiency can occur as a primary condition or secondary to HCM. Mitral insufficiency in cats is almost always caused by thickening of the valve leaflets which prevents the valve from closing properly. This allows blood to leak through the valve from the left ventricle to the left atrium during systole (regurgitation). Thickening of the valve leaflets can be independent of HCM and is usually caused by myxomatous degeneration (myxomatous atrioventricular valvular degeneration) which is usually progressive-- however, the rate of progression can be very slow. I don't know of any drug that slows the progression of mitral valve degeneration. I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Since posting I did hear back from the cardiologist. She explained that whether the mitral valve leaflet is mildly or moderately thickened is just her visual impression at the moment and didn't necessarily mean anything had changed over time. She felt that whether the thickening is mild or moderate is insignificant. She said, just as you have, that the thickening could be an independent process or could be caused by the HCM, due to the outflow obstruction. She and my vet seemed to think that it's far more likely with a cat to be caused by HCM than independent valve disease. Myxomatous degeneration, as you mention, seems to also be called endocarditis Endocardiosis - not endocarditis. Endocarditis is inflammation of the valve leaflets. and I couldn't find anything about it in cats, except that it's very rare or some sources say it is non-existent in cats. My vet says he's never seen a case of it in a cat. Its probably underdiagnosed because not many necropsies are preformed on cats with HCM and/or MR because the COD is already known. Fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet is also common in HCM cats with MR. Do you know whether there is any way to tell whether the valve problem is caused by the HCM or not? I don't know if there's a way to distinguish a primary valve disease from one that occurs secondary to HCM in a cat with HCM. The diagnosis of HCM is based on "LV size, wall thickness, and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS%, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-.62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. The small buldge in the LVOT could be a fibrous contact plaque. The white arrow in the photo: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/LVOT.jpg See how close the plaque is to the anterior mitral leaflet (AMVL in the photo) No SAM or LVOT obstruction." (initial echo showed mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction 50 mm Hg, 50 mm Hg is very mild. now eliminated by the atenolol). If I understood correctly, my vet seemed to be saying that this bulge interferes with the function of the mitral valve and that could cause it to thicken. Does that sound plausible? Yes-- if the mitral valve leaflet keeps hitting the ventricular septum it could become fibrotic.. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/mitr...al_contact.jpg Follow the arrow from SAM The cardiologist said the important thing is that the report was good and the atenolol is improving heart function by decreasing the LVOT and secondary mitral regurgitation. That's the important thing! MR produces a feedback loop- "MR begets MR" and can lead to CHF. This report gives MR Vmax and MR maxPG figures but those were not reported in the first echo so I can't see how much it's been reduced. This says MR Vmax 3.94 m/s. I realize I should probably just be happy that the HCM hasn't progressed but I'm a bit bewildered by the mention of the valve problem. The first report mentioned a thickened mitral valve leaflet and mild MR but it was presented to me as part of the HCM. That's probably because mitral regurgitation and fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet almost always occur secondary to LVOT obstruction in cats with HCM- They're considered part of HCM. This second report says "there is still mitral valve thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation" which almost sounds to me as though the cardiologist expected this to improve or disappear with the atenolol. I'm not sure why it would, however. Did she mention anything about the papillary muscles or chordae tendineae? Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver The report really doesn't sound too bad- I wouldn't be too upset. Best of luck, Phil |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
On Dec 9, 11:43 pm, "Phil P." wrote:
"yngver" wrote in message ... On Dec 7, 11:37 am, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message ... We just had our six month follow up echo for our cat who was diagnosed with very mild HCM in May. I'm having trouble understanding the results and I hope you can shed some light while I wait to hear back from the cardiologist to clarify. Our cat was diagnosed with mild HCM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation, also mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. She had a grade 2 murmur. She has been on atenolol, 1/4 tablet twice a day which lowered heart rate to 140-150 (goal range) and eliminated the murmur. These latest echo results show no progression of the HCM, no SAM, no LVOT obstruction, no heart murmur. However, what I don't understand is that the cardiologist said the mitral valve is thicker (moderate now vs. mild) and there is still mild mitral regurgitation. I was told this is separate from the HCM. The conclusion was "Stable disease. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency. Recheck echo in one year." I'm having trouble understanding what is causing the mitral insufficiency if it isn't from HCM. My vet just said the cardiologist didn't explain it so he will have to talk to her. She did write "there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or any other cardiac size measurements" so I thought at first that meant nothing had gotten worse. I hope Phil reads this and can comment, or anyone else who has any ideas on what this means. I haven't been able to find anything about this kind of valve problem in cats. Thanks for any advice. -yngver Mitral insufficiency can occur as a primary condition or secondary to HCM. Mitral insufficiency in cats is almost always caused by thickening of the valve leaflets which prevents the valve from closing properly. This allows blood to leak through the valve from the left ventricle to the left atrium during systole (regurgitation). Thickening of the valve leaflets can be independent of HCM and is usually caused by myxomatous degeneration (myxomatous atrioventricular valvular degeneration) which is usually progressive-- however, the rate of progression can be very slow. I don't know of any drug that slows the progression of mitral valve degeneration. I'm sorry I can't be more helpful. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Since posting I did hear back from the cardiologist. She explained that whether the mitral valve leaflet is mildly or moderately thickened is just her visual impression at the moment and didn't necessarily mean anything had changed over time. She felt that whether the thickening is mild or moderate is insignificant. She said, just as you have, that the thickening could be an independent process or could be caused by the HCM, due to the outflow obstruction. She and my vet seemed to think that it's far more likely with a cat to be caused by HCM than independent valve disease. Myxomatous degeneration, as you mention, seems to also be called endocarditis Endocardiosis - not endocarditis. Endocarditis is inflammation of the valve leaflets. and I couldn't find anything about it in cats, except that it's very rare or some sources say it is non-existent in cats. My vet says he's never seen a case of it in a cat. Its probably underdiagnosed because not many necropsies are preformed on cats with HCM and/or MR because the COD is already known. Fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet is also common in HCM cats with MR. Do you know whether there is any way to tell whether the valve problem is caused by the HCM or not? I don't know if there's a way to distinguish a primary valve disease from one that occurs secondary to HCM in a cat with HCM. I guess that's basically what the cardiologist was saying as well, but that most likely it's the HCM that caused the mitral valve leaflet to thicken. The diagnosis of HCM is based on "LV size, wall thickness, and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS%, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-.62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. The small buldge in the LVOT could be a fibrous contact plaque. The white arrow in the photo: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/LVOT.jpg See how close the plaque is to the anterior mitral leaflet (AMVL in the photo) So there is no way to tell which caused which, the bulge causing the leaflet to thicken through contact or vice versa. No SAM or LVOT obstruction." (initial echo showed mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction 50 mm Hg, 50 mm Hg is very mild. That's good to know. It's gone or greatly reduced now, she said. now eliminated by the atenolol). If I understood correctly, my vet seemed to be saying that this bulge interferes with the function of the mitral valve and that could cause it to thicken. Does that sound plausible? Yes-- if the mitral valve leaflet keeps hitting the ventricular septum it could become fibrotic.. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/mitr...al_contact.jpg Follow the arrow from SAM The cardiologist said the important thing is that the report was good and the atenolol is improving heart function by decreasing the LVOT and secondary mitral regurgitation. That's the important thing! MR produces a feedback loop- "MR begets MR" and can lead to CHF. I thought the atenolol would stop the MR, but it hasn't. This report gives MR Vmax and MR maxPG figures but those were not reported in the first echo so I can't see how much it's been reduced. This says MR Vmax 3.94 m/s. I realize I should probably just be happy that the HCM hasn't progressed but I'm a bit bewildered by the mention of the valve problem. The first report mentioned a thickened mitral valve leaflet and mild MR but it was presented to me as part of the HCM. That's probably because mitral regurgitation and fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet almost always occur secondary to LVOT obstruction in cats with HCM- They're considered part of HCM. Okay, thanks. That seems to be have a better prognosis than primary valve disease. This second report says "there is still mitral valve thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation" which almost sounds to me as though the cardiologist expected this to improve or disappear with the atenolol. I'm not sure why it would, however. Did she mention anything about the papillary muscles or chordae tendineae? No, and I'm assuming if there were something abnormal there she would have. Everything else in the report is listed as normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta (ascending and arch), pulmonary artery, all normal. LA/Ao 1.15. Is this something I should ask her about? Don't cardiologists normally look at the papillary muscles when diagnosing HCM, so am I right in assuming she must have done so? Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver The report really doesn't sound too bad- I wouldn't be too upset. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Your assessment that the report doesn't sound very bad means a lot to me, since I know you have a lot of experience in this area. Thanks for helping me feel better about this. -yngver |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
"yngver" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 11:43 pm, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message I'm sorry for the delay response- I've been really busy. I'm nursing a cat whose in pretty bad shape, so I have a little time. She was attacked by a dog. When we x-rayed and echoed her to look for internal damage, we found a bullet in he side! That's probably why the dog was able to catch her. I think she'll be alright. Its probably underdiagnosed because not many necropsies are preformed on cats with HCM and/or MR because the COD is already known. Fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet is also common in HCM cats with MR. I came across this by Neil Harpster- DACVIM-Cardiology- he was director of cardiology at Angell for many years: "The prevalence of degenerative changes affecting the left AV valve leaflets in the cat is significant, for myxomatous degeneration is common in all forms of cardiomyopathy. However, myxomatous degeneration can also be found in some cats not exhibiting the classic or clearcut findings of cardiomyopathy." Do you know whether there is any way to tell whether the valve problem is caused by the HCM or not? I don't know if there's a way to distinguish a primary valve disease from one that occurs secondary to HCM in a cat with HCM. I guess that's basically what the cardiologist was saying as well, but that most likely it's the HCM that caused the mitral valve leaflet to thicken. The jet might be smaller in a cat with MR secondary to HCM- But I have an older human machine with a frame rate that's probably too slow to compare the differences acurately in cats with warp-speed hearts. If I remember correctly, her last measurements weren't really that bad- could you post them again along with the most recent measurements - Did you happen to get photo printouts or a video of the echo? The diagnosis of HCM is based on "LV size, wall thickness, and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS%, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-.62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. The small buldge in the LVOT could be a fibrous contact plaque. The white arrow in the photo: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/LVOT.jpg See how close the plaque is to the anterior mitral leaflet (AMVL in the photo) So there is no way to tell which caused which, the bulge causing the leaflet to thicken through contact or vice versa. The septal leaflet is a lot bigger than than the posterior (parietal) leaflet- this can make the septal cusp *seem* thick. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/left...ular_valve.jpg Do you know if she did the echo herself or did she just interpret the results? Is she basing her diagnosis of HCM solely on the septal bulge? No SAM or LVOT obstruction." (initial echo showed mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction 50 mm Hg, 50 mm Hg is very mild. That's good to know. It's gone or greatly reduced now, she said. now eliminated by the atenolol). If I understood correctly, my vet seemed to be saying that this bulge interferes with the function of the mitral valve and that could cause it to thicken. Does that sound plausible? Yes-- if the mitral valve leaflet keeps hitting the ventricular septum it could become fibrotic.. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/mitr...al_contact.jpg Follow the arrow from SAM The cardiologist said the important thing is that the report was good and the atenolol is improving heart function by decreasing the LVOT and secondary mitral regurgitation. That's the important thing! MR produces a feedback loop- "MR begets MR" and can lead to CHF. I thought the atenolol would stop the MR, but it hasn't. It wouldn't if there's a problem with the leaflets or some other component of the valve. This report gives MR Vmax and MR maxPG figures but those were not reported in the first echo so I can't see how much it's been reduced. This says MR Vmax 3.94 m/s. I realize I should probably just be happy that the HCM hasn't progressed but I'm a bit bewildered by the mention of the valve problem. The first report mentioned a thickened mitral valve leaflet and mild MR but it was presented to me as part of the HCM. That's probably because mitral regurgitation and fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet almost always occur secondary to LVOT obstruction in cats with HCM- They're considered part of HCM. Okay, thanks. That seems to be have a better prognosis than primary valve disease. This second report says "there is still mitral valve thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation" which almost sounds to me as though the cardiologist expected this to improve or disappear with the atenolol. I'm not sure why it would, however. Did she mention anything about the papillary muscles or chordae tendineae? No, and I'm assuming if there were something abnormal there she would have. Everything else in the report is listed as normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta (ascending and arch), pulmonary artery, all normal. LA/Ao 1.15. Is this something I should ask her about? Yes. If the chordae tendineae are short (or long) or thick- or extend into the cusp, they can prevent the MV from closing properly. Abnormal or displaced papillary muscles (which anchor the chordae tendineae and MV) that don't contract properly can also cause MR. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg Don't cardiologists normally look at the papillary muscles when diagnosing HCM, so am I right in assuming she must have done so? I wouldn't take anything for granted. If they're normal- she should have said they're normal especially since they are components of the MV apparatus in a cat with MR. Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver The report really doesn't sound too bad- I wouldn't be too upset. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Your assessment that the report doesn't sound very bad means a lot to me, since I know you have a lot of experience in this area. Thanks for helping me feel better about this. -yngver Don't forget to post the first echo - if you can. Best of luck, Phil |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
On Dec 18, 3:59 am, "Phil P." wrote:
"yngver" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 11:43 pm, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message I'm sorry for the delay response- I've been really busy. I'm nursing a cat whose in pretty bad shape, so I have a little time. She was attacked by a dog. When we x-rayed and echoed her to look for internal damage, we found a bullet in he side! That's probably why the dog was able to catch her. I think she'll be alright. That's terrible, worse even than the cat we rescued who was shot with a bbgun. I'm glad to her she will be alright. Its probably underdiagnosed because not many necropsies are preformed on cats with HCM and/or MR because the COD is already known. Fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet is also common in HCM cats with MR. I came across this by Neil Harpster- DACVIM-Cardiology- he was director of cardiology at Angell for many years: "The prevalence of degenerative changes affecting the left AV valve leaflets in the cat is significant, for myxomatous degeneration is common in all forms of cardiomyopathy. However, myxomatous degeneration can also be found in some cats not exhibiting the classic or clearcut findings of cardiomyopathy." I suppose it depends on whether the HCM diagnosis is clearcut. Do you know whether there is any way to tell whether the valve problem is caused by the HCM or not? I don't know if there's a way to distinguish a primary valve disease from one that occurs secondary to HCM in a cat with HCM. I guess that's basically what the cardiologist was saying as well, but that most likely it's the HCM that caused the mitral valve leaflet to thicken. The jet might be smaller in a cat with MR secondary to HCM- But I have an older human machine with a frame rate that's probably too slow to compare the differences acurately in cats with warp-speed hearts. If I remember correctly, her last measurements weren't really that bad- could you post them again along with the most recent measurements - Did you happen to get photo printouts or a video of the echo? No, I didn't get a photo printout or video, just a copy of the cardiologist's report. Here is the first report: Repost-- Here is the summary: Overall left ventricle systolic function is normal with FS% greater than 35%. The left ventricle size is normal. Left ventricular free wall thickness is normal. Mild asymmetric septal hypertrophy with bulge of basal IVS into the LV outflow tract. Mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction (50 mm hg). The left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium all normal in size and function. Aortic valve normal. No aortic stenosis or regurgitation. Tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta, pulmonary aorta all normal. Mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. Mild mitral regurgitation present, predominately a posteriorly directed jet. Values: 2D IVSd .55 cm LVPWd .54 cm (aren't these normal values? They are less than .6 cm.) Ao diam 1.05 cm LA diam 1.25 cm LA/Ao 1.19 M-Mode IVSd .51 cm LVIDd 1.44 cm LVPWd .47 cm IVSs .71 cm LVIDs .60 cm LVPWs .90 cm EDV(Teich) 5.46 ml ESV (Teich) .51 ml EF (Teich) 90.67% %FS 58.23% SV (Teich) 4.95 ml Doppler AV Vmax 2.67 m/s AV maxPG 28.47mmHg PV Vmax 1.27 m/s PV maxPG 6.48 mmHG Grade 2/6 systolic murmur L apex, gallop; mm pink; normal pulses. ECG rhythm: Sinus rhythm. Cardiac size wnl. Pulm vasc. wnl. Lungs wnl. (rads) Diagnosis: Mild hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. Normal LA size so low risk of CHF/LA clot at this time. Recommend Tx with beta-blocker Atenolol (6.25 mg BID) to decrease LVOT obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. ******************************************** Second report, at six months: 2D IVSd .61cm LVPWd .48 cm Ao diam 1.19 cm LA diam 1.37 cm LA/Ao 1.15 M-Mode IVSd .59 cm LVIDd 1.34 cm LVPWd .49 cm IVSs .78 cm LVIDs .57 cm LVPWs .87cm EDV(Teich) 4.47 ml ESV (Teich) .45 ml EF (Teich) 89.99% %FS 56.97% SV (Teich) 4.02 ml Ao Diam 1.12 cm LA Diam 1.29 cm LA/Ao 1.16 RVIDd .79 cm RVIDs .61 cm HR 151.68 bpm Doppler MR Vmax 3.94 m/s MR maxPG 61.99 mmHg AV Vmax .70 m/s AV maxPG 1.96 mmHg PV Vmax .51 m/s PV maxPG 1.06 mmHG (these last values have diminished quite a bit, which I assume is good, right? Or is this just due to a slower heart rate?) ECG and Radiographic findings: PE: no murmur or gallop. MM pink, pulses wnl. Lung sounds wnl. Findings: Sinus rhythm. Left ventricle: LV size, wall thickness and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS %, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-. 62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. No SAM or LVOT obstruction. Mitral valve: The mitral valve is thickened. Moderate thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. Mild mitral regurgitation is present, predominately a centrally directed jet. (does it mean anything that in the previous echo it was a posterior directed jet?) All other findings normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta, pulmonary artery. Diagnosis: compared with the findings of the previous study, there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or in any other cardiac size measurements. There is no LV outflow turbulence or obstruction on the Atenolol. There is still mitral thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation. Recommend continue Tx with Beta- blocker Atenolol (6.25 mg BID) to keep the HR lowered which will decrease LV obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. Stable disease since 5/07. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency due to mitral valve thickening. No apparent cardiac contraindications for anesthesia at this time. Recheck ECHO in one year to assess progression; sooner if problems. ************************************************** ******************************* The diagnosis of HCM is based on "LV size, wall thickness, and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS%, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-.62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. The small buldge in the LVOT could be a fibrous contact plaque. The white arrow in the photo: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/LVOT.jpg See how close the plaque is to the anterior mitral leaflet (AMVL in the photo) So there is no way to tell which caused which, the bulge causing the leaflet to thicken through contact or vice versa. The septal leaflet is a lot bigger than than the posterior (parietal) leaflet- this can make the septal cusp *seem* thick. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/left...ular_valve.jpg Do you know if she did the echo herself or did she just interpret the results? Is she basing her diagnosis of HCM solely on the septal bulge? The cardiologist travels among several cat clinics (and I guess "dog and cat" clinics too) and brings her ultrasound equipment with her. They don't let the owner come in the room but from what I could see through the window, she did the echo herself while an assistant holds the cat down. Unfortunately this means the owner doesn't get to talk to the cardiologist directly. The vet comes out and tells you the report. Then when I had question, he called her to discuss it with her and let me know what she said. I assume the way the report is written, the diagnosis is based on what she is calling mild focal hypertrophy of the basal LVS with small bulge into the LVOT. No SAM or LVOT obstruction." (initial echo showed mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction 50 mm Hg, 50 mm Hg is very mild. That's good to know. It's gone or greatly reduced now, she said. now eliminated by the atenolol). If I understood correctly, my vet seemed to be saying that this bulge interferes with the function of the mitral valve and that could cause it to thicken. Does that sound plausible? Yes-- if the mitral valve leaflet keeps hitting the ventricular septum it could become fibrotic.. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/mitr...al_contact.jpg Follow the arrow from SAM The cardiologist said the important thing is that the report was good and the atenolol is improving heart function by decreasing the LVOT and secondary mitral regurgitation. That's the important thing! MR produces a feedback loop- "MR begets MR" and can lead to CHF. I thought the atenolol would stop the MR, but it hasn't. It wouldn't if there's a problem with the leaflets or some other component of the valve. My vet said there isn't any way to make the mitral valve leaflet get thinner, so my assumption is the goal of treatment is to prevent further thickening. Of course he is not a cardiologist. This report gives MR Vmax and MR maxPG figures but those were not reported in the first echo so I can't see how much it's been reduced. This says MR Vmax 3.94 m/s. I realize I should probably just be happy that the HCM hasn't progressed but I'm a bit bewildered by the mention of the valve problem. The first report mentioned a thickened mitral valve leaflet and mild MR but it was presented to me as part of the HCM. That's probably because mitral regurgitation and fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet almost always occur secondary to LVOT obstruction in cats with HCM- They're considered part of HCM. Okay, thanks. That seems to be have a better prognosis than primary valve disease. This second report says "there is still mitral valve thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation" which almost sounds to me as though the cardiologist expected this to improve or disappear with the atenolol. I'm not sure why it would, however. Did she mention anything about the papillary muscles or chordae tendineae? No, and I'm assuming if there were something abnormal there she would have. Everything else in the report is listed as normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta (ascending and arch), pulmonary artery, all normal. LA/Ao 1.15. Is this something I should ask her about? Yes. If the chordae tendineae are short (or long) or thick- or extend into the cusp, they can prevent the MV from closing properly. Abnormal or displaced papillary muscles (which anchor the chordae tendineae and MV) that don't contract properly can also cause MR. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg Don't cardiologists normally look at the papillary muscles when diagnosing HCM, so am I right in assuming she must have done so? I wouldn't take anything for granted. If they're normal- she should have said they're normal especially since they are components of the MV apparatus in a cat with MR. I will ask. I'm surprised she didn't mention this then. I have a suspicion, however, that the written reports she gives the vet (which is he gives me when I ask for a copy) is just a summary of her complete findings. I've seen considerably briefer reports than this one posted on the feline heart group. Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver The report really doesn't sound too bad- I wouldn't be too upset. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Your assessment that the report doesn't sound very bad means a lot to me, since I know you have a lot of experience in this area. Thanks for helping me feel better about this. -yngver Don't forget to post the first echo - if you can. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. I've posted both reports for your comparison. When you have a chance to take a look, I'd appreciate your impression. I was thinking of trying a different cardiologist, but I've been told by several other owners of HCM cats that this one is good, and recommended by the nearest veterinary school. There is only one other veterinary cardiologist in the area that I could find, and I don't know if he is any better. -yngver |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
"yngver" wrote in message ... On Dec 18, 3:59 am, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 11:43 pm, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message I'm sorry for the delay response- I've been really busy. I'm nursing a cat whose in pretty bad shape, so I have a little time. She was attacked by a dog. When we x-rayed and echoed her to look for internal damage, we found a bullet in he side! That's probably why the dog was able to catch her. I think she'll be alright. That's terrible, worse even than the cat we rescued who was shot with a bbgun. I'm glad to her she will be alright. She's doing really well. I think she'll be ready to go into foster next week- that's if I don't fall in love with her! The bullet my vet took out looks like a .22 or .25. I really want to find the shooter so I can return his bullet to him.... If I remember correctly, her last measurements weren't really that bad- could you post them again along with the most recent measurements - Did you happen to get photo printouts or a video of the echo? No, I didn't get a photo printout or video, just a copy of the cardiologist's report. At the next check up, ask the vet if she can make a video or photo printout. You can use them to get second opinions without having to get you cat scanned. You can also send them to some of the top guns like Kittleson. Here is the first report: Repost-- Here is the summary: Overall left ventricle systolic function is normal with FS% greater than 35%. The left ventricle size is normal. Left ventricular free wall thickness is normal. Mild asymmetric septal hypertrophy with bulge of basal IVS into the LV outflow tract. Mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction (50 mm hg). The left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium all normal in size and function. Aortic valve normal. No aortic stenosis or regurgitation. Tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta, pulmonary aorta all normal. Mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. Mild mitral regurgitation present, predominately a posteriorly directed jet. Values: 2D IVSd .55 cm LVPWd .54 cm (aren't these normal values? They are less than .6 cm.) Ao diam 1.05 cm LA diam 1.25 cm LA/Ao 1.19 M-Mode IVSd .51 cm LVIDd 1.44 cm LVPWd .47 cm IVSs .71 cm LVIDs .60 cm LVPWs .90 cm EDV(Teich) 5.46 ml ESV (Teich) .51 ml EF (Teich) 90.67% %FS 58.23% SV (Teich) 4.95 ml Doppler AV Vmax 2.67 m/s AV maxPG 28.47mmHg PV Vmax 1.27 m/s PV maxPG 6.48 mmHG Grade 2/6 systolic murmur L apex, gallop; mm pink; normal pulses. ECG rhythm: Sinus rhythm. Cardiac size wnl. Pulm vasc. wnl. Lungs wnl. (rads) Diagnosis: Mild hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. Normal LA size so low risk of CHF/LA clot at this time. Recommend Tx with beta-blocker Atenolol (6.25 mg BID) to decrease LVOT obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. ******************************************** Second report, at six months: 2D IVSd .61cm LVPWd .48 cm Ao diam 1.19 cm LA diam 1.37 cm LA/Ao 1.15 M-Mode IVSd .59 cm LVIDd 1.34 cm LVPWd .49 cm IVSs .78 cm LVIDs .57 cm LVPWs .87cm EDV(Teich) 4.47 ml ESV (Teich) .45 ml EF (Teich) 89.99% %FS 56.97% SV (Teich) 4.02 ml Ao Diam 1.12 cm LA Diam 1.29 cm LA/Ao 1.16 RVIDd .79 cm RVIDs .61 cm HR 151.68 bpm Doppler MR Vmax 3.94 m/s MR maxPG 61.99 mmHg AV Vmax .70 m/s AV maxPG 1.96 mmHg PV Vmax .51 m/s PV maxPG 1.06 mmHG (these last values have diminished quite a bit, which I assume is good, right? Or is this just due to a slower heart rate?) Actually, the IVS and LVFW have increased just a tad. ECG and Radiographic findings: PE: no murmur or gallop. MM pink, pulses wnl. Lung sounds wnl. Findings: Sinus rhythm. Left ventricle: LV size, wall thickness and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS %, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-. 62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. No SAM or LVOT obstruction. Mitral valve: The mitral valve is thickened. Moderate thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. Mild mitral regurgitation is present, predominately a centrally directed jet. (does it mean anything that in the previous echo it was a posterior directed jet?) All other findings normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta, pulmonary artery. Diagnosis: compared with the findings of the previous study, there has been no significant change in the degree of LV hypertrophy or in any other cardiac size measurements. There is no LV outflow turbulence or obstruction on the Atenolol. There is still mitral thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation. Recommend continue Tx with Beta- blocker Atenolol (6.25 mg BID) to keep the HR lowered which will decrease LV obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. Stable disease since 5/07. Potential for progression of mitral insufficiency due to mitral valve thickening. No apparent cardiac contraindications for anesthesia at this time. Recheck ECHO in one year to assess progression; sooner if problems. ************************************************** ************************** ***** The diagnosis of HCM is based on "LV size, wall thickness, and systolic function are normal, with a normal FS%, except for a mild focal hypertrophy (.61-.62 cm) of the basal IVS with a small bulge into the LVOT. The small buldge in the LVOT could be a fibrous contact plaque. The white arrow in the photo: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/LVOT.jpg See how close the plaque is to the anterior mitral leaflet (AMVL in the photo) So there is no way to tell which caused which, the bulge causing the leaflet to thicken through contact or vice versa. The septal leaflet is a lot bigger than than the posterior (parietal) leaflet- this can make the septal cusp *seem* thick. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/left...ular_valve.jpg Do you know if she did the echo herself or did she just interpret the results? Is she basing her diagnosis of HCM solely on the septal bulge? The cardiologist travels among several cat clinics (and I guess "dog and cat" clinics too) and brings her ultrasound equipment with her. They don't let the owner come in the room but from what I could see through the window, she did the echo herself while an assistant holds the cat down. Unfortunately this means the owner doesn't get to talk to the cardiologist directly. The vet comes out and tells you the report. Then when I had question, he called her to discuss it with her and let me know what she said. I assume the way the report is written, the diagnosis is based on what she is calling mild focal hypertrophy of the basal LVS with small bulge into the LVOT. This may seem like a funny question-- but does she strike you as more academic than intuitive? I have a reason for asking. No SAM or LVOT obstruction." (initial echo showed mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction 50 mm Hg, 50 mm Hg is very mild. That's good to know. It's gone or greatly reduced now, she said. now eliminated by the atenolol). If I understood correctly, my vet seemed to be saying that this bulge interferes with the function of the mitral valve and that could cause it to thicken. Does that sound plausible? Yes-- if the mitral valve leaflet keeps hitting the ventricular septum it could become fibrotic.. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/mitr...al_contact.jpg Follow the arrow from SAM The cardiologist said the important thing is that the report was good and the atenolol is improving heart function by decreasing the LVOT and secondary mitral regurgitation. That's the important thing! MR produces a feedback loop- "MR begets MR" and can lead to CHF. I thought the atenolol would stop the MR, but it hasn't. It wouldn't if there's a problem with the leaflets or some other component of the valve. My vet said there isn't any way to make the mitral valve leaflet get thinner, so my assumption is the goal of treatment is to prevent further thickening. Of course he is not a cardiologist. This report gives MR Vmax and MR maxPG figures but those were not reported in the first echo so I can't see how much it's been reduced. This says MR Vmax 3.94 m/s. I realize I should probably just be happy that the HCM hasn't progressed but I'm a bit bewildered by the mention of the valve problem. The first report mentioned a thickened mitral valve leaflet and mild MR but it was presented to me as part of the HCM. That's probably because mitral regurgitation and fibrosis of the anterior mitral valve leaflet almost always occur secondary to LVOT obstruction in cats with HCM- They're considered part of HCM. Okay, thanks. That seems to be have a better prognosis than primary valve disease. This second report says "there is still mitral valve thickening and mild secondary mitral regurgitation" which almost sounds to me as though the cardiologist expected this to improve or disappear with the atenolol. I'm not sure why it would, however. Did she mention anything about the papillary muscles or chordae tendineae? No, and I'm assuming if there were something abnormal there she would have. Everything else in the report is listed as normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta (ascending and arch), pulmonary artery, all normal. LA/Ao 1.15. Is this something I should ask her about? Yes. If the chordae tendineae are short (or long) or thick- or extend into the cusp, they can prevent the MV from closing properly. Abnormal or displaced papillary muscles (which anchor the chordae tendineae and MV) that don't contract properly can also cause MR. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg Don't cardiologists normally look at the papillary muscles when diagnosing HCM, so am I right in assuming she must have done so? I wouldn't take anything for granted. If they're normal- she should have said they're normal especially since they are components of the MV apparatus in a cat with MR. I will ask. I'm surprised she didn't mention this then. I have a suspicion, however, that the written reports she gives the vet (which is he gives me when I ask for a copy) is just a summary of her complete findings. I've seen considerably briefer reports than this one posted on the feline heart group. I don't think she wrote it-- it looks like the computer generated the report. My machine does the same thing- prints out a canned report based on the scans. The academic vets let the machines diagnosis the patients. An intuitive vet uses the machine as a tool. Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver The report really doesn't sound too bad- I wouldn't be too upset. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Your assessment that the report doesn't sound very bad means a lot to me, since I know you have a lot of experience in this area. Thanks for helping me feel better about this. -yngver Don't forget to post the first echo - if you can. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. I've posted both reports for your comparison. When you have a chance to take a look, I'd appreciate your impression. I was thinking of trying a different cardiologist, but I've been told by several other owners of HCM cats that this one is good, and recommended by the nearest veterinary school. There is only one other veterinary cardiologist in the area that I could find, and I don't know if he is any better. -yngver Thanks for reposting the report. Too bad they didn't give you a photo or video, I was hoping to see if the bulge in the septum was really due to focal hypertrophy or if its due to just a sharper-than-average angle in the septum. In cats, the top of the septum curves towards the RA just about at the point of the septal cusp of the MV. (See: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg) If the septum curves at a sharp angle, it can produce a bulge without any actual hypertrophy. I think this could be the case with your cat because at .55 cm, the septum wasn't hypertrophied anywhere near enough to cause SAM and LVOT obstruction by itself- actually, the IVS was and still is practically normal. The SAM & LVOT obstruction resolved even though the IVS thickness increased because the atenolol decreased the acceleration of blood ejected from the LV-- which in turn reduced the pressure that was pushing the MV leaflet into the LVOT. I'm not a vet, but if you want my opinion, get a second opinion. Your cat probably doesn't even have HCM- I think the problem is only in the MV apparatus- probably just the septal leaflet. Thickening of the valve leaflet is also a component of mitral dysplasia. Something else to look into. The cardiologist's machine should have recording capabilities- probably CD. Get a video copy next time so you can get opinions from top shelf cardiologists without taking your cat out of the house-- that's assuming the echoes are halfway decent! Please keep me posted. Best of luck, Phil |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
I'm cutting some of this out because it's getting too long to follow.
On Dec 19, 9:02 am, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message That's terrible, worse even than the cat we rescued who was shot with a bbgun. I'm glad to her she will be alright. She's doing really well. I think she'll be ready to go into foster next week- that's if I don't fall in love with her! The bullet my vet took out looks like a .22 or .25. I really want to find the shooter so I can return his bullet to him.... I agree. I take it the bullet didn't hit anything vital. I'm surprised a cat can survive a gunshot wound. That's a bit of sore spot with me anyway--when I was a kid one of the neighbor kids shot my mother's beloved dog. Thought it was funny. At the next check up, ask the vet if she can make a video or photo printout. You can use them to get second opinions without having to get you cat scanned. You can also send them to some of the top guns like Kittleson. I could ask at the next heart recheck, which is in three months, but that's just when our vet checks heart rate and blood pressure. He could find out whether the cardiologist made a video. Otherwise our cat is not due for another echo for a year, and I'm not sure I want to wait that long. Here is the first report: Repost-- Here is the summary: Overall left ventricle systolic function is normal with FS% greater than 35%. The left ventricle size is normal. Left ventricular free wall thickness is normal. Mild asymmetric septal hypertrophy with bulge of basal IVS into the LV outflow tract. Mild SAM with mild LV outflow tract obstruction (50 mm hg). The left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium all normal in size and function. Aortic valve normal. No aortic stenosis or regurgitation. Tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta, pulmonary aorta all normal. Mild thickening of the anterior mitral valve leaflet. Mild mitral regurgitation present, predominately a posteriorly directed jet. Values: 2D IVSd .55 cm LVPWd .54 cm (aren't these normal values? They are less than .6 cm.) Ao diam 1.05 cm LA diam 1.25 cm LA/Ao 1.19 M-Mode IVSd .51 cm LVIDd 1.44 cm LVPWd .47 cm IVSs .71 cm LVIDs .60 cm LVPWs .90 cm EDV(Teich) 5.46 ml ESV (Teich) .51 ml EF (Teich) 90.67% %FS 58.23% SV (Teich) 4.95 ml Doppler AV Vmax 2.67 m/s AV maxPG 28.47mmHg PV Vmax 1.27 m/s PV maxPG 6.48 mmHG Grade 2/6 systolic murmur L apex, gallop; mm pink; normal pulses. ECG rhythm: Sinus rhythm. Cardiac size wnl. Pulm vasc. wnl. Lungs wnl. (rads) Diagnosis: Mild hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with LV outflow tract obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. Normal LA size so low risk of CHF/LA clot at this time. Recommend Tx with beta-blocker Atenolol (6.25 mg BID) to decrease LVOT obstruction and secondary mitral regurgitation. ******************************************** Second report, at six months: 2D IVSd .61cm LVPWd .48 cm Ao diam 1.19 cm LA diam 1.37 cm LA/Ao 1.15 M-Mode IVSd .59 cm LVIDd 1.34 cm LVPWd .49 cm IVSs .78 cm LVIDs .57 cm LVPWs .87cm EDV(Teich) 4.47 ml ESV (Teich) .45 ml EF (Teich) 89.99% %FS 56.97% SV (Teich) 4.02 ml Ao Diam 1.12 cm LA Diam 1.29 cm LA/Ao 1.16 RVIDd .79 cm RVIDs .61 cm HR 151.68 bpm Doppler MR Vmax 3.94 m/s MR maxPG 61.99 mmHg AV Vmax .70 m/s AV maxPG 1.96 mmHg PV Vmax .51 m/s PV maxPG 1.06 mmHG (these last values have diminished quite a bit, which I assume is good, right? Or is this just due to a slower heart rate?) Actually, the IVS and LVFW have increased just a tad. Well, I noticed that, but the cardiologist said no significant change. I meant the AV Vmax, PV Vmax--these decreased significantly from the first echo. (snipped the conclusions in the echo) ************************************************** ************************** ***** Do you know if she did the echo herself or did she just interpret the results? Is she basing her diagnosis of HCM solely on the septal bulge? The cardiologist travels among several cat clinics (and I guess "dog and cat" clinics too) and brings her ultrasound equipment with her. They don't let the owner come in the room but from what I could see through the window, she did the echo herself while an assistant holds the cat down. Unfortunately this means the owner doesn't get to talk to the cardiologist directly. The vet comes out and tells you the report. Then when I had question, he called her to discuss it with her and let me know what she said. I assume the way the report is written, the diagnosis is based on what she is calling mild focal hypertrophy of the basal LVS with small bulge into the LVOT. This may seem like a funny question-- but does she strike you as more academic than intuitive? I have a reason for asking. I can't really answer that because I never talked to her. My vet conveys to me what she says. And that part bothers me, because I'd rather talk to the cardiologist face to face. I couldn't find an office listing for her, so I think she only sees cats and dogs by referral traveling to the various clinics. I will send you her name by email rather than post it, in case you or anyone you've worked with has heard of her. She seems to come highly recommended on the feline heart group, from what I could find. (more about the echo snipped) Did she mention anything about the papillary muscles or chordae tendineae? No, and I'm assuming if there were something abnormal there she would have. Everything else in the report is listed as normal: left atrium, right ventricle, right atrium, aortic valve, tricuspid valve, pulmonic valve, pericardium, aorta (ascending and arch), pulmonary artery, all normal. LA/Ao 1.15. Is this something I should ask her about? Yes. If the chordae tendineae are short (or long) or thick- or extend into the cusp, they can prevent the MV from closing properly. Abnormal or displaced papillary muscles (which anchor the chordae tendineae and MV) that don't contract properly can also cause MR. http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg Don't cardiologists normally look at the papillary muscles when diagnosing HCM, so am I right in assuming she must have done so? I wouldn't take anything for granted. If they're normal- she should have said they're normal especially since they are components of the MV apparatus in a cat with MR. I will ask. I'm surprised she didn't mention this then. I have a suspicion, however, that the written reports she gives the vet (which is he gives me when I ask for a copy) is just a summary of her complete findings. I've seen considerably briefer reports than this one posted on the feline heart group. I don't think she wrote it-- it looks like the computer generated the report. My machine does the same thing- prints out a canned report based on the scans. The academic vets let the machines diagnosis the patients. An intuitive vet uses the machine as a tool. Okay, that's interesting to me. I didn't know the computer could generate a canned report. At least at our clinic, she did echoes on five cats in one afternoon, so maybe to produce reports on that many cats, she has to let the computer do it. I could tell some of the language was picked up from the last report, but I glimpsed her in the exam room doing what I thought was writing up a report. My vet told me the cardiologist said she she didn't look at the previous scan when she wrote up her impression of the mitral valve leaflet, which I also thought was curious. Your comments are most appreciated--thanks so much, Phil. -yngver The report really doesn't sound too bad- I wouldn't be too upset. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Your assessment that the report doesn't sound very bad means a lot to me, since I know you have a lot of experience in this area. Thanks for helping me feel better about this. -yngver Don't forget to post the first echo - if you can. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. I've posted both reports for your comparison. When you have a chance to take a look, I'd appreciate your impression. I was thinking of trying a different cardiologist, but I've been told by several other owners of HCM cats that this one is good, and recommended by the nearest veterinary school. There is only one other veterinary cardiologist in the area that I could find, and I don't know if he is any better. -yngver Thanks for reposting the report. Too bad they didn't give you a photo or video, I was hoping to see if the bulge in the septum was really due to focal hypertrophy or if its due to just a sharper-than-average angle in the septum. In cats, the top of the septum curves towards the RA just about at the point of the septal cusp of the MV. (See:http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg) I looked at the jpg, but I couldn't really tell much myself. If the septum curves at a sharp angle, it can produce a bulge without any actual hypertrophy. I think this could be the case with your cat because at .55 cm, the septum wasn't hypertrophied anywhere near enough to cause SAM and LVOT obstruction by itself- actually, the IVS was and still is practically normal. The SAM & LVOT obstruction resolved even though the IVS thickness increased because the atenolol decreased the acceleration of blood ejected from the LV-- which in turn reduced the pressure that was pushing the MV leaflet into the LVOT. I'm not a vet, but if you want my opinion, get a second opinion. Your cat probably doesn't even have HCM- I think the problem is only in the MV apparatus- probably just the septal leaflet. Thickening of the valve leaflet is also a component of mitral dysplasia. Something else to look into. The cardiologist's machine should have recording capabilities- probably CD. Get a video copy next time so you can get opinions from top shelf cardiologists without taking your cat out of the house-- that's assuming the echoes are halfway decent! Please keep me posted. Best of luck, Phil Thanks, Phil. Now I have to think about what to do. I looked up mitral dysplasia and read this is a common congenital abnormality in cats, but it seems to me it's unlikely it would first show up in a cat at age nine if she was born with it. Also, if it is the mitral valve problem alone, wouldn't treatment be pretty much the same--atenolol to reduce the MR and eliminate the SAM? I am wondering if changing the diagnosis will make a difference in the treatment plan. In other words, is this something I need to find out right away to get proper treatment, or is it a case in which whether it is HCM or mitral dysplasia, the course of the disease might be about the same? I want to mention one more thing to you--our cat has longstanding asthma, well controlled with Flovent. One vet in the clinic, not my regular vet, mentioned that asthma over many years can affect the heart. Could there be a connection? Thanks again for all your help, Phil. -yngver |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ping Phil: Second Echo results for HCM
"yngver" wrote in message ... I'm cutting some of this out because it's getting too long to follow. On Dec 19, 9:02 am, "Phil P." wrote: "yngver" wrote in message Actually, the IVS and LVFW have increased just a tad. I probably wouldn't have said that if I knew she didn't look at the previous echo. She probably didn't measure the same area as in the first echo. I can't really answer that because I never talked to her. My vet conveys to me what she says. And that part bothers me, That would bother me too. I think you and your cat would be better off if you consulted a specialist with whom you can communicate and ask questions and who can educate you about your cat's illness. The "traveling show vets" don't talk to you because you're not paying them- your vet is. She bills him for the echo and he just marks it up. You cat isn't her patient- your vet is her client. I don't like arraignments like that. because I'd rather talk to the cardiologist face to face. I couldn't find an office listing for her, so I think she only sees cats and dogs by referral traveling to the various clinics. I will send you her name by email rather than post it, in case you or anyone you've worked with has heard of her. I didn't get your email. Try it again: topcatATmaxshouseDOTcom She seems to come highly recommended on the feline heart group, from what I could find. How could anyone recommend her? She doesn't have any actual patients. I don't think she wrote it-- it looks like the computer generated the report. My machine does the same thing- prints out a canned report based on the scans. The academic vets let the machines diagnosis the patients. An intuitive vet uses the machine as a tool. Okay, that's interesting to me. I didn't know the computer could generate a canned report. At least at our clinic, she did echoes on five cats in one afternoon, so maybe to produce reports on that many cats, she has to let the computer do it. I could tell some of the language was picked up from the last report, but I glimpsed her in the exam room doing what I thought was writing up a report. My vet told me the cardiologist said she she didn't look at the previous scan when she wrote up her impression of the mitral valve leaflet, which I also thought was curious. So how could she make a comparison? I was hoping to see if the bulge in the septum was really due to focal hypertrophy or if its due to just a sharper-than-average angle in the septum. In cats, the top of the septum curves towards the RA just about at the point of the septal cusp of the MV. (See:http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/feline_heart.jpg) I looked at the jpg, but I couldn't really tell much myself. Try this-- I outlined the curve in the septum in white: http://maxshouse.com/Cardiology/angu...tum%20copy.jpg Thanks, Phil. Now I have to think about what to do. I looked up mitral dysplasia and read this is a common congenital abnormality in cats, but it seems to me it's unlikely it would first show up in a cat at age nine if she was born with it. Mitral dysplasia can be congenital or aquired. A cat could be asymptomatic for years- or even life- depends on the severity. Also, if it is the mitral valve problem alone, wouldn't treatment be pretty much the same--atenolol to reduce the MR and eliminate the SAM? There's more to HCM than MR & SAM. I am wondering if changing the diagnosis will make a difference in the treatment plan. In other words, is this something I need to find out right away to get proper treatment, or is it a case in which whether it is HCM or mitral dysplasia, the course of the disease might be about the same? The course of the disease would not be the same. I want to mention one more thing to you--our cat has longstanding asthma, well controlled with Flovent. One vet in the clinic, not my regular vet, mentioned that asthma over many years can affect the heart. Could there be a connection? I don't think there's any connection. Untreated asthma could lead to cor pulmonale- but that involves the right side of the heart. There's no evidence in echo report. Thanks again for all your help, Phil. -yngver I wish you and your cat a happy holiday Best of luck, Phil |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ping Phil: Echo results for HCM diagnosis | yngver | Cat health & behaviour | 2 | June 19th 07 04:03 PM |
Ping Phil and Nomen: Just received HCM echo printout | yngver | Cat health & behaviour | 4 | June 4th 07 04:17 PM |
Ping Phil P. Results | Paul O. | Cat health & behaviour | 8 | December 7th 05 01:00 AM |
Ping Phil | No More Retail | Cat health & behaviour | 4 | November 14th 05 07:55 PM |
Ping Phil P. | CatNipped | Cat health & behaviour | 4 | June 29th 05 02:14 PM |