Given the severity (significant), and speed (relatively slow), I'd get a second opinion from a (different?) top-tier medical facility. Sometimes doctors just d

Given the severity (significant), and speed (relatively slow), I'd get a second opinion from a (different?) top-tier medical facility. Sometimes doctors just don't know what they need to know in order to best treat a condition, and they're not good at polling the competition (though many try). It's up to the motivated patient to fill that gap, though it's probably a long shot. The aorta moves, constantly, making any kind of characterization or manipulation nearly impossible without stopping it, running the risk that it may not start up again. No doctor in their right mind would risk killing their patient for test results that aren't urgently needed. The patient staying alive is the goal. Some tumors stop growing all on their own, and there may be decades of functionality left in spite of the growth. When the heart ends up limping along from occluded flow, running a bypass would seem like a commonly-performed procedure. That may not be applicable but the death rate for a coronary bypass for a patient under 65 (presumably like your baby mama) is under 1 percent. Maybe things aren't as dire as they seem.