Paul Jason
Chapter 1: Every Journey Has a Beginning
It was a clear, dry March day in New York, the type so much appreciated as the cold of Winter begins to recede into the warmth of Spring. After a light lunch, leisurely eaten at my desk as I surfed the Internet to learn the latest world and local events, I grabbed my attache case and began the two-block walk to my car. I was on the way to an appointment that afternoon and the case, together with the documents contained within, weighed about fifteen pounds. A two-block walk carrying a fifteen-pound attache case was a non-event for me prior to that day. But, on that particular day, as I walked towards my car, I began to experience a sensation that I can best describe as “slight indigestion” in my upper chest, which I immediately recognized as being unlike any other indigestion I had ever experienced. It wasn’t located in the abdomen (isn’t that where upset stomachs are supposed to strike?). And it wasn’t a sharp pain in the chest (isn’t that what heart attacks are supposed to feel like?) No, this was different, and I knew it.
Upon reaching my car, I placed the attache on the rear seat, and sat down in the driver’s seat. Within a minute, the unusual sensation was gone. Cause for concern? I didn’t know.
My appointment was uneventful - - I negotiated the short distance to and from my parked car with no difficulty; but, when I returned to my hometown, parked my car in its usual spot, and began the two-block walk back to my own office, I once again experienced this unusual upper chest sensation. And, once again, when I sat down for a minute, it went away.
Much to my chagrin, I experienced that sensation several times during the next few days, each time while carrying relatively light objects.
Thus I decided it was time to visit my primary care physician to investigate further.
Now, my doctor is, I believe (based upon recommendation and experience) a competent and concerned internist. At the time of our first meeting in September, 1995, he wrote down in great detail not only my medical history, but the medical histories of both of my parents and my three siblings. In the approximately five years that he had been attending to my health needs, he had demonstrated genuine concern for my welfare, and undistracted attention to my medical complaints.
On this occasion, he conducted a rather thorough examination, including blood pressure, pulse, reflexes, electrocardiogram (ECG), and drew blood for lab tests. At the conclusion of the exam, he advised me that he had found nothing out of the ordinary compared to my prior records. However, he indicated that based upon my family history of heart disease he thought it advisable to have a cardiologist examine me. I was quickly referred to a local, recognized cardiology group.
I had never before met the cardiologist with whom I consulted, although I was casually familiar with one of his partners. The group of five doctors had a good reputation, and this particular physician was pleasant, direct and professional. Looking lean and fit, this forty-something young man, a graduate of the Albany Medical College, with specialty training at Mount Sinai Hospital and Montefiore Medical Center, both in New York, took a medical history from me and proceeded to conduct a physical examination similar to the one I had received from my internist. One of his staff assistants also performed an electrocardiogram. At the conclusion, the cardiologist stated that he had not detected anything significant, but that my family history was sufficient to merit further investigation. He indicated that his preference was to have me undergo a non-invasive test before recommending an invasive one. Therefore, he scheduled a nuclear stress test for me, to be conducted right there in his suite of offices, within a matter of days.
The purpose of a stress test of the heart is to ascertain whether the heart muscle receives sufficient blood when it has to exert itself. A normal heart is capable of increasing its output (measured by the volume of blood pumped per minute) to several times its usual output when it is stressed. The goal of the test is to provoke the heart to boost its output.
The “nuclear” part of the test refers to the use of either thallium or sestamibi, radioactive substances (isotopes). When introduced into the bloodstream, these substances collect in those portions of the heart muscle that have good blood flow. If one of the coronary arteries is blocked or partially blocked, less of these substances accumulates in the portion of the muscle supplied by that artery.
For those not familiar with the procedure, it is a test in two parts. In part one, the radioactive isotope is injected into the patient and allowed to circulate for about an hour. Then the patient is placed in a horizontal position while a special camera (it looked like an x-ray machine to me) takes “pictures” of his heart for about twenty minutes from a variety of angles. These images provide a baseline profile of the blood flow in and around the heart. This is the “rest” part of the test.
The second part of the test consists of the patient being hooked up to an
electro-cardiogram machine and placed on a treadmill or stationary bicycle. A blood pressure cuff is placed on one arm. Sometimes a little sensor is clipped onto the tip of an index finger to measure the amount of oxygen in the blood. The patient is asked to commence exercise and to continue while the energy demands are gradually increased. The patient is expected to continue for as long as he is capable, or until a predetermined peak heart rate is achieved. Usually, there is a point at which the patient can no longer keep up because of fatigue, or because symptoms such as chest pain, shortness of breath or lightheadedness occur. This is the “stress” part of the test.
At that zenith - - the maximum level of exercise - - the isotope is once again injected into the body and the patient is allowed to come to rest. Throughout the procedure the patient’s heart rate and blood pressure are monitored. At the conclusion of the stress portion of the test, images are again taken of the patient’s heart from a variety of angles, allowing for an analysis of the flow during both rest and at the point of maximum exertion. Thus, the use of thallium or sestamibi greatly increases the accuracy of the stress test in diagnosing coronary artery disease.
The test can also measure the functional capacity of the patient. If, for example, signs of ischemia (insufficient supply of oxygenated blood to the heart) occur at a low level of exercise, the arterial blockages are likely to be significant. On the other hand, if ischemia does not occur, or if it occurs only at high levels of exercise, the blockages are likely to be less significant.
Since exercise also raises the level of adrenaline, a stress test can be an aid in diagnosing certain cardiac arrhythmias that tend to occur when adrenaline levels are elevated.
The level of exercise to which the patient is exposed is based upon a carefully calculated scale, known as the Bruce Protocol. Robert Bruce was the developer of the standardized treadmill test for diagnosing and evaluating heart and lung diseases. The Bruce Protocol, a multi-stage test, was first introduced in 1963. The Protocol consists of seven stages, each lasting three minutes. During each stage the treadmill moves at a pre-set speed and pre-set elevation, as shown on the following chart:
| Stage |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
| Speed (mph) |
1.7 |
2.5 |
3.4 |
4.2 |
5.0 |
5.5 |
6.0 |
| Grade (%) |
10 |
12 |
14 |
16 |
18 |
20 |
22 |
It is estimated that about 70% of the millions of stress tests currently performed annually in the United States to evaluate heart function use this protocol.
Of course I didn’t know all of this when I had my test. I did know that the exercise would be performed on a treadmill. And, this particular medical group prefers to conduct the two parts of the test on different days. This was contra to the procedure followed in the two similar stress tests I had undergone during the prior twenty years (at approximately 10 year intervals).
I was surprised, and more than a little concerned, to learn that the treadmill test was to be administered by a Nurse Practitioner, not an M.D. Of course, I was advised, one of the cardiologists in the group would be present “somewhere in the suite” of offices during the test, but the Nurse Practitioner would actually be the one to conduct it.
I wasn’t familiar with the title “Nurse Practitioner”. I knew that there were Registered Nurses (”RNs”) and Licensed Practical Nurses (”LPNs”) around; but, what was a Nurse Practitioner (”NP”)? I subsequently learned that a lot of other people are not familiar with the term either. I wasn’t particularly comfortable with the idea that anyone less than a licensed physician would be in charge of a test that I knew begins with the patient signing a disclaimer form stating that he knows that there are potential risks involved with the procedure, including the possibility of heart attack or stroke. Nevertheless, anxiety over a determination of the status of my health prevailed and I submitted to the ministrations of the NP.
Later, when I had the time to make inquiry I learned that she has more experience and ability to administer that test than most cardiologists do.
But I must return to the stress test itself, which was conducted on Friday, March 17, 2000: St. Patrick’s Day. (Whatever happened to those St. Patrick’s Days when I celebrated with corned beef and cabbage, boiled potatoes, lots of mustard, Irish soda bread and just enough beer to wash the whole, happy meal down???). For a few minutes, with the NP and a young RN present, I seemed to be doing well. Then, my worst fears were realized; I began to feel the same discomfort in my upper chest that had brought me to this moment to begin with. I immediately advised the NP and the “stress” portion of the test was terminated shortly thereafter, but not before the isotope had been introduced into my body. Afterward, with the aid of that isotope pictures of my heart were taken from a variety of angles. I was advised to call the cardiologist on the following Monday afternoon for the results.
Needless to say, I spent a very apprehensive weekend wondering what, if anything, was wrong with me. Afraid to exert myself lest I unintentionally trigger a heart attack, I nevertheless continued to mull over in my mind my actions over the past several years: moderate exercise; low fat/low sodium diet; medication to successfully lower my cholesterol; regular blood tests to oversee all of this; a diet high in fruits and vegetables; and periodic medical check-ups to monitor my general health.
At the appointed hour, I called the cardiologist=s office. He informed me that he detected some “abnormality” from the results of my stress test and recommended that I undergo cardiac catheterization. He advised me that one of his partners routinely performed these procedures and that he could arrange to have it performed at either Columbia- Presbyterian Medical Center in Manhattan, or Montefiore Medical Center (Moses Division) in The Bronx. Since Montefiore was more convenient for me, I chose to have it done there. The procedure was scheduled for March 29th.
In addition to being concerned about my health, I was also very disappointed. I had been hoping to vacation in Costa del Sol (Spain) for more than five years, but had never been able to actually schedule that trip. At long last, I was scheduled to leave on that vacation on March 30th. Ironically, compared to many of my peers, I allowed myself a meager number of days each year as vacation time, and I was particularly looking forward to this trip. Nevertheless, prudence dictated that I not wait until March 29th to find out if I was in good enough physical condition to leave for Europe the next day. So, sadly, I called the travel agent and cancelled the trip. Perhaps I could re-book it, after the catheterization, for some time in April or early May.
to be continued next week….