Anyone ever have a CT Angiogram?

Factual Questions
1

Or more generally, is anyone knowledgable about current cardiac stuff? I’ve just been diagnosed with possible cardiac symptoms (mostly trouble breathing after mild exertion), saw a cardiologist, who recommended a CT Angiogram, which claim was rejected by my insurance carrier (it costs about a grand, the cardiologist thinks, but wasn’t sure) and now am thinking about paying the 1000 (?) dollars to see if my breathing problems are caused by a partial blockage of my arteries.

Also, I’m wondering how long state-of-the-art treatments like a CTA stay classified “experimental” (which is why the insurance company rejected it). According to the cardiologist, we can try applying again in six months, because they may revise their “experimental” categorization, but I’m worried naturally that I may not be here in six months, and it seems foolish to save 1000 dollars and lose my life.

There is another type of angiogram that’s been around for much longer (I had an angiogram twenty-five years ago), and that certainly wasn’t considered excperimental then, so what’s the deal with the CTA? Does it detect blocked arteries in a way that a more traditional angiogram can’t begin to, or is it just a matter of degree?

I sense that this is a subject that I’m going to be learning a lot more about soon, so if anyone can recommend sites or books that explain this stuff in layman’s terms, that would also be very helpful. Thanks.

2

The difference is the quality of the images. The traditional Angiogram is a simple, 2 dimensional floroscopic image in real time. The doctor puts a radio-opaque catheter into (usually) the femoral artery, then watches its progress through the vessel to the heart, he then injects a contrast (“dye”) that outlines the cornary arteries. he takes some “stills” he can go over later.

The “CT” stands for Computerized Tomographic. The pictures are 3 dimensional, (and I believe, in color) so finding the exact problem area is easier. It can guide the doctor to be able to do, for example an exact ablation of an excitable focus (that means “zapping” an area that causes an arrhythmia).
The reason it’s so expensive, is:
A. R&D isn’t paid for.
B. The equipment is much more complicated.
The insurance co. Just doesn’t want to pay that up front cost, as long as the traditional (read cheaper) method is still available.
If there were no other means of seeing your cornary arteries, they still wouldn’t want to pay for, in their view, an “unproven technology”
Some insurance companies still won’t pay for bone marrow transplantation, and the first one was done in 1977, nearly 30 years ago!
If you can afford it, the CTA will give your doctor better information. If you can’t, a traditional angiogram is still a good option.
Good luck.