frazzled (mrboo…@msn.com) wrote:
: Hey everybody,
: Thanks, but I know about the methods and problems involved. I am asking
: about the EF itself. MUGA, cath or echo makes me no never mind. Assuming
: the method used to determine EF is accurate, what is a "normal" EF? That
: simple. I have been quoted 55% by all my cardiologists, and my internist.
The problem is it is not simple. None of the techniques are likely to give a
number that is the true ejection fraction. This doesn’t matter though because
all you want is a technique that is reproducible and knowledge of the normal
range by that method. The only way to know your normal range using your
equipment and your technique is by measuring EF from patients that are defined
as normal. For this reason EFs should not be compared between hospitals and
techniques.