|
Based on my reading here, I requested an echo (ultrasound) in lieu of MUGA. Onc looked at me funny and said fine. That's what I have been doing lately. No one has come back arguing that MUGA's are more accurate. ECHO's (no blood or nuclear meds) are so much easier, cheaper, etc. I haven't heard any reason to do otherwise. My initial thought was if you have had recent surgery, that pressure from the transducer might be painfull from the echo. I know nothing about these tests, but I think if you're relatively healthy MUGA's are overkill. Why would someone want nuclear meds injected if the same results could be realized from ultrasound? Unless someone tells me otherwise, I think docs get caught up in the latest and greatest technology and don't think through the side effects vs efficacy. It's not a big deal to them that you're on your 100th poke. BB
|