Mri vs ct

As far as I know the best option to detect early RCC Mets is CT scan with contrast, they also choose MRI with contrast if the patient has allergy to CT's contrast or the kidney doesn't work properly. MRI has less side effect for kidney and also for the possibility of getting leukemia, but it's not as accurate as CT scan. But if n your special case it might be different, it's good to have second opinion from another onc

Forough

I don't know which is better MRI or CT, I get CT scans every three months.  I do know chest xrays are not good at spotting smaller METS my ONC told me that the CT gets just about everything as far as I can tell.  I would be questions the xrays though.

Mark

donna_lee said:

Tetter totter act

After having CT w/wo contrast for nearly 3 years on a 3 or 6 month occurrence, my oncologist wanted to reduce the amount of radiation.   Because there had been mets to both the liver and lymph nodes in the abdomen and low pelvis, he changed to Chest x-ray and US of abdoment & pelvis, with only a CT yearly or every 18 mo.  That's when they caught the thyroid at the top of the CT and the enlarging nodes on the left side.  So I had more frequent tests after that.

Once you have had a couple of chest xrays that establishes what is there, it is any difference in the new ones that they use for comparison.  And a change in a 3 mo. to a 6 mo. will be noticeable.  And at nearly 10 years, I still have labs and see the onc. nurse or Dr. every 4-5 months and have some sort of test yearly.

Other than to dx a back problem, I've never had a MRI with the cancer situation.  And now that there are so many vascular clips, and some metal in other parts of my body, and MRI is contraindicated.  (the metal heats up and polarizes, trying to turn with the magnet)  The xray/US is definitely easier to go through, especially without needing the sippy cup juice.

I don't know if there is any one best answer, as we all have other conditions the doctors need to be concerned with when prescribing the tests to have.  But all you need to do is ask the questions for your situation.

**** luck and Hugs,

donna_lee

 

 

I've had the same question because my oncologist stopped ordering CT's of the abdomen and pelvis last year because he said that they are useless without contrast.  I asked how we are ever going to know if it spreads there.  He said we aren't until it causes pain or other symptoms.  I've been having pain in my right side so I decided I wanted to have a CT or MRI or something, worthless, or not and he has approved them.  I really wanted to hear from a radiologist who reads the scans whether they are worthless.  I actually got to speak to one who is very experienced.  He said that he wouldn't say that they are worthless, but it can be easy to miss things.  He said that MRI's and CT's each have their own advantages and disadvantages.  MRI's are better at picking up things in the muscle but can miss other small things.  He said it would have helped if I were overweight because it helps to separate the organs or something.  He said MRI contrast is safer as long as you don't have really bad kidney failure.  My kidney disease is bad enough that I can't have CT contrast, but not so bad that I can't have MRI contrast. He also said that, with my pain being on the same side as my nephrectomy, it can be hard to distinguish scar tissue from mets.  He recommended that I start with the CT without contrast and, if anything looks suspicious, other scans can be ordered.

I did not ask the radiologist, but have been told before that chest x-rays can miss things that are picked up on CT.

Kathy

I get both every year. hope all is well with you and family.