CSN Login
Members Online: 11

You are here

CT results back. Please give me your opinion...

J_B's picture
Posts: 17
Joined: May 2013

As Ive explained in the past, the ultra sound said i had a 4cm x 2.5 x 2.5 renal lesion in left upper kidney.


I just picked up the CT Scan and it gives a long list of what isn't there, like lung base lesion, anatomic cardiac lesion etc etc.

But here's the kidney part:


Conclusion: (Mind you-their report screws up by saying Specifically, the renal lesion 3.0 cm (instead of 4cm)

The mass seen on ultrashound likely represents mild to moderate size extrarenal pelvis seen on CT.

Specifically, the renal lesion 3.0 cm in diameter described on the previous ultrashound is not identified by CT. It may be the left extrarenal pelvis. Cholelithiases clearly present on the abdominal ultrasound cannot be identified on the CT examination.


Has anyone had any issues with one test saying one thing and the other test saying completely different?

I don't know which result to believe now-any insight??

I don't have a follow up with my doctor until 2 weeks from today....because he's on vacation.  

Galrim's picture
Posts: 305
Joined: Apr 2013

You need to go into details with a radiologist/urologist, but from what I can decipher the lesion in the ultrasound is most likely due to you having an extrarenal pelvis. A relatively rare but in most cases uncomplicated feature.

i think you can safely call off the RCC alert, the chance of a CT scan mis-identifying a tumor as an extrarenal pelvis is far-fetched.


icemantoo's picture
Posts: 2247
Joined: Jan 2010


I did a little googling and it sounds like you wont be allowed in our club. We will miss you, but if things change you can always re-apply.



rainsandpours's picture
Posts: 134
Joined: Apr 2013

"Cholelithiases" means Gallstones.  They are not always visible on CT


Did you have a Renal CT protocol with contrast?  It's a specific type of Ct scan to check for tumors.  I know from my own experience that my regular CT showed a mass that "was not clearly cystic".  The US didn't show it at all.  Only the Renal protocol identified it.



MDCinSC's picture
Posts: 574
Joined: Feb 2013

What do you think all?


Posts: 70
Joined: Apr 2013

My CT (~8cm) and MRI(~9cm) showed different sizes for my tumor (one week apart) and in the end it was over 10 cm. My doc said that is not unusual considering how the images are obtained.

Just my 2 cents...

icemantoo's picture
Posts: 2247
Joined: Jan 2010

The CT or other measurements of tumors are to a certain extent 3 dimensional and estimares. The actual size is determined in a biopsy after it is out. Mine was 2.6 cm after the CT and 4.2 cm when measured after surgery. MRI"s give different views. Until the sucker is out and measured its size is an estimated guess.



Subscribe to Comments for "CT results back.   Please give me your opinion..."