CT Scan

it's not an exact science
They will be looking for anything that is out of place from normal. There are also normal variants/ possibilities among humans. Have you ever overlayed a piece of paper, over say a test scoring sheet, to score one of those ABCD multiple choice tests. It's kind of the same thing as they really need the first one to become the template and then after that they use it as a template or baseline to make comparitive analogy. They will then be able to tell from this point forward what is normal for you. This is the way they find small changes from test to test.

It may also be that something is really obvious, like a small tumor. This would show up as a nodule, spot, or specific size shape, say a 2cm by 2 cmm rectangle. They will then decide to watch or investigate further. They can tell from size, shape, consistency and how translucent the cells appear how likely it may be cancer. The CT can get pretty low around 3-4 mm but not anywhere near the size of a cancer cell. Unless it's obvious they won't show anything definitive and they will classify it as "No Evidence Of Cancer". When they are really not sure they will say something like, "Not likely to be metastic disease" You can really gain a lot of knowledge by reading and looking carefully at the words chosen to describe the result. Also different radiologist use different lingo.

please make sure to ask for a copy of the written report as well as a copy of the CD. They do not generally charge for these. Start keeping your own record for comparison or future consultations with different doctors. It's not an exact science.

Skiffin16 said:

For me and many on here, it's a regular thing....I had a CT every three months the first year, now almost two years post, I'm down to a CT every six months or so, and the PET annual.

It doesn't really show cancer cells. It's more of a comparison to other scans that you have had. Mainly to look for any signs of change in the tissues, tumors, etc....

Best,
John

Thanks John
Go to my ENT on Thursday for his version of the PS/CT results, and may suggest to him that I get just a CT in six months for exactly the reasons you state. I'd had no tests between 4/10-4/11, other than the dental Xray at the U of Iowa, and if a CT could pick up a potential problem- would be well worth it.

Thanks

kcass

Kent Cass said:

Thanks John
Go to my ENT on Thursday for his version of the PS/CT results, and may suggest to him that I get just a CT in six months for exactly the reasons you state. I'd had no tests between 4/10-4/11, other than the dental Xray at the U of Iowa, and if a CT could pick up a potential problem- would be well worth it.

Thanks

kcass

Healing
Kent, I guess we always tend to think of the possible bad things that could be happening. I mentioned above about changes from the previous scans, implying they were only looking for negative things going on.

But in reality, they are also looking for positive things as well. I know on my reports that accompany the scans, they mention that swelling or scarring (residual) in certain areas are improved from previous scans, reduced or no lypmhedema present..etc.

Best,
John

KristynRuth86 said:

Thanks!
I can't say it enough, you guys are SOOOOOOOOO helpful. I'd honestly be lost without y'all! I'm so sorry Glenna to hear there was a change, but I'll pray that everything goes smoothly for you. Take care hun!
-Kristyn

Thank you Kristyn
I'm not going to let this news get me down, most days I'm able to enjoy life without even thinking about it. On the days when the doubts and fears start to take over I remind myself that it may be nothing and just because they found a new lesion doesn't mean it's cancer. Have to keep reminding myself it isn't cancer until they biopsy it and the results come back positive.

Thank you so much for your concern, I'm sure that I will be posting good results next month after my scan.

Stay strong,
Glenna