Pathology report

BellaBinksMom
BellaBinksMom Member Posts: 78
in Kidney Cancer #1

It appears my tumor was much larger than the original 5.5 cm they saw on the CT scan.  It measures 12.5 cm x 7 cm x 6 cm.  It was 50% necrotic.  Given its size and the happy news that it appears to have been confined to the kidney, it was Fuhrman grade 2, clear cell renal cell carcinoma.  

My surgeon was sick today, so, I saw the PA.  I will have to wait until the surgeon is back in the office and calls me to determine what my treatment routine will be going forward.  I am very happy there was no renal artery involvement and all margins were negative.  

Thank you for the prayers my friends.  While nothing is guaranteed, I am feeling positive and ready to continue with the fight to remain disease free!

 

Debbie

 

 

Comments

  • jason.2835
    jason.2835 Member Posts: 337 Member
    #2
    CT doc needs to be fired

    Reported it 5.5 cm and it was 7 cm bigger than that?  Wow, I question what the lab doc was looking at on the CT... Other than that, all the other news sounds good!  

  • BellaBinksMom
    BellaBinksMom Member Posts: 78
    #3
    jason.2835 said:

    CT doc needs to be fired

    Reported it 5.5 cm and it was 7 cm bigger than that?  Wow, I question what the lab doc was looking at on the CT... Other than that, all the other news sounds good!  

    We plan to ask

    Jason - My husband and I are thinking the same thing.  It is a question we have for the surgeon when we talk to him.  We are wondering if the fact that 50% of the tumor being necrotic (i.e. no blood flow) would change how it appears on the CT.  

  • jason.2835
    jason.2835 Member Posts: 337 Member
    #4
    BellaBinksMom said:

    We plan to ask

    Jason - My husband and I are thinking the same thing.  It is a question we have for the surgeon when we talk to him.  We are wondering if the fact that 50% of the tumor being necrotic (i.e. no blood flow) would change how it appears on the CT.  

    Google search

    I did a quick search on necrotic tumors not showing up on CT or MRI; nothing even remote came up. Most were just reports of necrotic tumors beung followed on CT... I was under the impression that it was better than MRI, but perhaps they were looking at it in an angle that stopped from seeing the whole picture? Who knows.

    One time my dad had an MRI for a knee injury and one doctor told him he had two torn ligaments. He got a second opinion at the Rothman Institute here in Philly and the doctor wondered if the last doctor had a medical degree because it was just normal wear and tear and strain. So I guess you never know What they're looking at. 

  • foroughsh
    foroughsh Member Posts: 779 Member
    #5
    The good news is that it was

    The good news is that it was confined to the kidney. I know someone who had very large RCC many years ago that no surgeon dare to do the surgery. It was big enough to be seen from outside. My surgeon did a surgery and she survived and didn't have reccurence, Thanks God. She was a housewife but after that, studied and became a physician. So no matter how large it is it will be still stage two and a good chance of never reccure again. It's also good new that the grade is 2. I think the oncologist will consider 50%necrotic in your follow up program.

     

     

     

     

  • Srashedb
    Srashedb Member Posts: 482 Member
    #6
    Discrepancy

    although ct scans, MRIs and other diagnostic tests are not as accurate as the actual measurements of a tumor, this one is quite a bit different.

    As to the 50% necrotic, I have not heard of it hiding the size. My husband's initial MRI saw some necroasis but the path report did not. It was never 50% but only a small part qualified with a "may".

    the good part of your report was the grade 2; to achieve the size it is must have taken years and it had not left the kidney 

    Sarah

  • Jojo61
    Jojo61 Member Posts: 1,309 Member
    #7
    Srashedb said:

    Discrepancy

    although ct scans, MRIs and other diagnostic tests are not as accurate as the actual measurements of a tumor, this one is quite a bit different.

    As to the 50% necrotic, I have not heard of it hiding the size. My husband's initial MRI saw some necroasis but the path report did not. It was never 50% but only a small part qualified with a "may".

    the good part of your report was the grade 2; to achieve the size it is must have taken years and it had not left the kidney 

    Sarah

    That is a big discrepancy,

    That is a big discrepancy, for sure!! But glad it was all encapsulated....makes you wonder what the heck happened with the reading.

    Hugs,

    Jojo

  • APny
    APny Member Posts: 1,995 Member
    #8
    Jojo61 said:

    That is a big discrepancy,

    That is a big discrepancy, for sure!! But glad it was all encapsulated....makes you wonder what the heck happened with the reading.

    Hugs,

    Jojo

    Vinnyc is a former CT/MRI

    Vinnyc is a former CT/MRI tech. Hopefully he’ll be able to shed some light on the huge discrepancy. I’ve heard that small differences are definitely possible but this is pretty big. Unless as you said, necrotic tissue doesn’t have a blood supply so it may not enhance on a CT. In any case, glad it was confined to the kidney; must be a relief.

  • Terry T
    Terry T Member Posts: 42
    #9
    didn't see this new

    didn't see this new post...happy for the good news...it is wild to have that kind of discrepency...what have they said about that?

  • BellaBinksMom
    BellaBinksMom Member Posts: 78
    #10
    Terry T said:

    didn't see this new

    didn't see this new post...happy for the good news...it is wild to have that kind of discrepency...what have they said about that?

    Still looking for an answer

    My urologist is puzzled by this huge discrepancy as well.  And it also makes a difference in my ongoing surveillance.  We are waiting on the pathologist to get back to us to confirm his findings and report.   

Discussion Boards