There's been a turf war going on between the two subspecialties for a while now regarding angiographic procedures, and now cross sectional cardiac imaging, in particular, cardaic MR. If an interventional cardiologist is the one reading the scan, I suppose it's OK if a knowledgeable person is in charge of the technical/imaging issues with the scanner, as they're the ones doing the caths, etc. on a regular basis. If, however, it's a run of the mill cardiologist, then I have an objection to that.

Rads read the scans and write the report. Cards then read the reports and might also look at the pics. I am new to this diagnostic imaging gig, but in my little experience I have found that it all comes down to the docs themselves. Just like anything else, some are better than other, whether it is a Rad or a Card. Some Rads have lots of cardiac CT experience, others have very little. Some write good reports and nail down the diagnosis, while others hedge their bets and give you a lot of CYA. That is especially true with Mammograms.

Philips makes a nice machine. We're outfittisng our new place with Philips stuff, including one of their PET/CTs.

I totally agree. I do not read cardiac MR as that's not my expertise, but one of my colleagues does, whereas in another group "just down the street" the cardiologist reads the scan, while the radiologist monitors it. I was just wondering what the general experience was, sort of an impromptu poll among the docs here. I, too, like the Phillips equipment. Our CT and MR equipment are all Phillips. Siemens is pretty good as well.

The coronary CT I had was done, and read, by cardiologists. In fact, the actual reading was done by one I went to med school with, and overread by another. They bought and operate their own 64-sensor machine (Phillips, as I recall) in one of their offices.

Regarding turf battles: it has always been, and will always be, so. Ortho/neurosurg for backs, plastics/ENT/OMFS for faces, etc.

I realise there will always be turf wars, and I have no problem with either an experienced (interventional) cardiologist or radiologist interpreting the images, as it's my opinion that there is a reason a cards fellowship and rad residency and fellowship are as long as they are. I just have a problem with inexperienced docs interpreting studies, that's the sole pupose for my initial question. Just wanted to ensure that your studies are being interpreted accurately, and that you're not paying out of pocket for a substandard exam/interpretation.

Sounds like I should just wait until I get the CD and post images...on X5world...:)

:rofl: :rofl: Then we could all comment on your "mods!" :)

“Glad you are OK...Amen as regards family history. Can you vouch for the fact that there are no warning signs?”


accella4.4: I can tell you I had no obvious symptoms prior to the occlusion of my LAD. I also worked for the City of Boston, Emergency Medical Service for over 20 years before entering the private sector so I am well trained (and experienced) on assessing Emergency Cardiac patients in the pre-hospital setting. There was nothing I could attribute in my pre-event history as a potential warning sign even after serious reflection while recovering. I was being cared for by my PCP (Primary Care Physician) regularly and had an “unremarkable” 12-lead ECG 6 months prior to the event.


MJM

0.00 Calcium Score! Data was acquired using a Philips Medical Systems 4-slice CT scanner....

Off to Krispi-Kreme...

Excellent news, congratulations!!!

MJM