To cut to the chase - Wren's first cardiology clinic in 15 months had mixed results. It could always be worse but his aortic stenosis appears to have advanced from moderate to critical. Critical is 50+ gradient over the valve. His was 55. Last appointment it was 45.
Now, that is where the clarity ends.
Dr Conwell was very amiable and calm. He said:
- The mitral valve looks about the same. It has mild regurgitation, no evidence of pulmonary hypertension and is abnormal. It is not a parachute valve but has short chordae and abnormal, restricted, motion.
- Wren has mild left ventricular hypertrophy (thickened heart), we knew this, but he does not know if it is worse. This is significant because they would expect some thickening if, as the numbers suggest...
- The aortic stenosis has gone from moderate to critical and we need to talk intervention.
They want 24 hour halter study data - Wren is wearing the halter now. It is a set of electrodes stuck to his upper body to measure his EKG all day. This is because Wren has left bundle branch block as a result of his last surgery - the electrical impulses are already a bit abnormal because of the damage to the bundle. They want to know if the damage was more widespread and would indicate the need for a pacemaker. This is not really a new thing, but if Wren needed surgery they would want it put in at the same time.
They did some chest x-rays to see if his heart is enlarged.
We will get some results back in a few weeks from the halter test, which will last until tomorrow afternoon. Josh is teasing Wren that he is like a robot. The nurse told him he is like an astronaut because they have to wear them all the time they are in space.
IF it seems the numbers are raised, we will repeat the echo in 2-3 months and also present to the cardiology conference. He suspects they would recommend a cath lab intervention to try and open the bicuspid aortic valve leaflets further. Other than a replacement, the cath lab might work as well as open heart surgery for this repair - he says.
I would want a second opinion from Dr Hanley's team and have said this.
So, we wait for:
1) The outcome of the discussion between Mark and Jeff.
2) The results of the chest x-ray.
3) The results of the halter-monitor
4) Any comments from the cardiology conference discussion.
We are disappointed but not reacting too much, yet, as there seems to be a lot of vagueness in the air. Something bad is suggested. Chocolate pudding is indicated.