View Single Post
Old 11-28-2005, 06:30 PM   #7
margaret
Senior Member
 
margaret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 49
I know I have submitted this post before in the past but I wish people would do more studies on the accuracy of the 'muga scan'. I think it has a very large margin of error in any given reading. I really would hate to see someone prevented from getting the life saving drug herceptin because of a 'faulty' inaccurate reading from a muga scan. I will keep resubmitting this post everytime someone gets a low reading.

Hi,
I justed wanted to share my experience with muga scans. I had my first muga scan at diagnosis and it came out to be 49. They weren't sure if they would give me herceptin. I did 4 rounds of A/C and then had another muga. It then read a 58. So according to these readings, the 3 months of harsh A/C actually improved my heart significantly. My oncologist laughed at the results. Obviously there is a large margin of error in these muga scans. I would hope that no one is ever prevented from getting herceptin just because of one low muga scan reading. I for one do not put any credit in one low muga scan reading. I had a very healthy heart the whole time and had no trouble with the herceptin. Thank god, my oncologist didn't just react to the first low reading.
margaret is offline   Reply With Quote