[Susie]

What do they mean when they say a "structurally normal heart" I mean, what is structurally normal?

On my echo, it only showed a small left ventricle, and it is only shy of being "normal size" by 3mm. (Normal is 40mm to 51mm, I am 37mm) So, is my heart still structurally normal? All other numbers and facts on the echo were fine. This number is at rest by way, diastole, in systole, it is 22mm, which is in normal range, so, it only shows small in diastole, no where else.

I get confused over this?

[Chaoticdopey]

Originally Posted by Susie

What do they mean when they say a "structurally normal heart" I mean, what is structurally normal?

On my echo, it only showed a small left ventricle, and it is only shy of being "normal size" by 3mm. So, is my heart still structurally normal? All other numbers and facts on the echo were fine.

I get confused over this?

I think its 6mm+ for it to really be abnormal. So your fine.

[Susie]

LOL, looks like folks are just as unsure as I am. Hopefully, I will get a clear-cut answer from a doctor, if so, I will let you know.

See ya later.
Susie

[dr461]

Originally Posted by Susie

What do they mean when they say a "structurally normal heart" I mean, what is structurally normal?

On my echo, it only showed a small left ventricle, and it is only shy of being "normal size" by 3mm. (Normal is 40mm to 51mm, I am 37mm) So, is my heart still structurally normal? All other numbers and facts on the echo were fine. This number is at rest by way, diastole, in systole, it is 22mm, which is in normal range, so, it only shows small in diastole, no where else.

I get confused over this?

Size isn't the issue, unless it is a gross abnormality. They are talking about valve malfunctions, cardiomyopathy, ejection fraction (pumping ability), and electrical node conductivity. Also, they look for "holes in the chambers," congenital malfunctions, and overall STRUCTURE of the heart. You are small, so you have a smaller heart--that isn't an abnormality. They are making sure in an echo that the mechanicals of the heart are sound. Size abnormalities would matter only insofar as they impacted on the pumping ability.

[tom]

Originally Posted by Susie

What do they mean when they say a "structurally normal heart" I mean, what is structurally normal?

On my echo, it only showed a small left ventricle, and it is only shy of being "normal size" by 3mm. (Normal is 40mm to 51mm, I am 37mm) So, is my heart still structurally normal? All other numbers and facts on the echo were fine. This number is at rest by way, diastole, in systole, it is 22mm, which is in normal range, so, it only shows small in diastole, no where else.

I get confused over this?

your dimensions are GREAT!!.. A a more meaningful measure of size is diameter index, where the Diastolic and systolic diameters are indexed to body size.. with height the main criteria. Women have smaller hearts to begin with and the body formula index takes that into account
Your systolic end measurement of 22 shows your ventricle has pumped with a high ejection fraction (high percent of blood has been pumped). This means you are getting maxiumum stroke volume which is also GREAT. I would bet an EF of >60 is on the report. Small hearts beat more often than larger ones and women have higher resting rates than men for that reason. Exercise will increase the filling capacity of both the left atrium and left ventricle (size), making your heart and lungs work easier, and also reduce your resting heart rate. Numerous studies show only 12 weeks of moderate cardio for 40 minutes 3x a week is sufficient. As an endurance athlete my LV end diastole diameter is 58, max index for my height is 55. Lance Armstrong's LVED is 65 and we are the same height and weight. Bottom line is your "numbers" are excellent from an exercise capacity standpoint. You are also less likely to develop heart desease.

tom

[Susie]

Thanks Tom~My one concern was, the end of the report said the study was "technically difficult" and they did not get an ejection fraction, but, they did get an LV shortening fraction which was great. My first echo, my EF was 75 however, that was 3 years ago.

The results comment also said: Small left ventricular size with normal left ventricular global systolic function. Grossly normal RT and LT heart size and function.

My resting heart rate is normally 67, but, after I am up for awhile, or get nervous, it goes into the 80s, and sometimes the high 70's.

[Katie]

Susie if anything was off they would tell you point blank: be careful of this, that and the other. Remind yourself that they have consistently told you that u are healthy and fine.

[tom]

2d doppler uses a complicated series of measurements to get the EF estimate. My guess is the quality of the echo was insufficient. Transthorasic echo can do a much better job. The 2D echo estimate can vary by 5% from one "analyst" to the next. 75% is OUTSTANDING, congratulations on a fine report. The term GROSS doesn't mean "ugly" it means "taking the big picture into account", like the term Gross National Product. Again, The normal shortening fraction also serves to show that both diastolic and systolic function of the mitral valve is working as it should. again, congratulations. Your resting heart rate is also spot on.

[CMoore416]

How do they tell if your heart is electrically sound in an echo? Obviously PVCs are electrically discharged so wouldn't all of us be unsound there? Not sure if this makes sense....

[dr461]

Christina, they have formulas to derive the firing of the heart chambers based on the structures and rate. They also take a careful look at the SA node, for the rate of electrical conductivity and "ejection fraction" of the heart in general (amount of blood pumped at a given rate). In addition, the structure of the valves show a lot, as to the size of the chambers and their pumping rate. I saw a chart once to show measurements of the normal ranges of echo findings, but it is very hard to interpret.

echo examination with and w/o doppler:http://www.heartsite.com/html/echocardiogram.html