For lungs...CT scan or Xray
Comments
-
Hi Maura,
It's interesting that you bring this up today. MSN has an artical on chest scans vs x-rays and it was shown on (I think) the Today Show (mom was telling me).
You should check it out at
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15414518/wid/11915773?GT1=8618
I was dx stage iii 1 node positive with cancerous polyp removed in my sigmoid colon. I too have no mets so far, thank God. I too have had an annual scope (will go to either 2 years or 3 years after this last one). I have had blood every three months. In the beginning (until insurance balked) I was receiving a PET/CT every 3 months. After insurance trouble, I started just the CT every 3 months. My last scan, my Dr started extending my scans out. It will be 7 months between scans this time. My CT scans have always been "from thighs to eyes". The only x-ray I have had was during the insertion of my port.
From what this article reads, if I am reading it right, is that CT's are a far better indicator of early tumor detection in the lungs. I want to read it again to make sure I understand it, though.
Good question, though.
Tricia0 -
Hi, from experience with my dad I would say a Cat Scan. My dad had the once a year X-Ray of his lungs. Then all of a sudden he had an x-ray and he had muliple lung tumors. I dont know why a year earlier the x-ray showed nothing. So I think Cat Scan would be the way to go. Mindy0
-
Maura -
My oncologist says that the "standard of care" for Stage III CRC with adjuvant chemo is 2 years of CT and PET scans every 3 months. Being Stage IV, but NED for 14 months, she is treating me that way. The insurance always complains about the PET, but in the end they always pay when the radiologist sends in the paperwork to explain that my CT's are somewhat "inconclusive" and whatever other magic words he knows he has to say (and so he says them). (I hate this insurance game!)
I am sure opinions vary, but I don't think a chest x-ray is worth all that much - think you should probably have CT of chest, abdomen and pelvis when you have your CT scans and probably a bit more than once a year. But, in the end I only know what I have been told - I don't like the radiation exposure, but at least in my case I think it is the lesser of evils - I dread a liver met showing up again, but I sure want it to be caught early (realize that is a little different since you haven't had Stage IV disease).
Take care,
Betsy0 -
I don't know the details of why, but I have CT of chest,adomen and pelvis. I had a very small lung met picked up on CT so I'm a 'fan'. I don't know if it wd have been on xray. REcently my docs have been discussing low-dosage CT, to reduce the amnt of radiation I'm exposed to.0
-
HI, Maura I agree with most. I am stage 4 liver metast and my Dr. has been doing the every 3 to 4 month( really 3 but sometimes a little nervous and go 4 month CAT Scan) of the Chest Abd and Pelvis. Will be going next month for check up and my 6 month colonoscopy.0
-
Maura,
CT is the way to go for the lungs. My sister, who had been coughing for months, had TWO xrays that showed nothing. Finally, after six months, her doctor ordered a CT and found multiple nodules. She was already Stage IIIB lung cancer by that time and passed five years ago. Xrays are pretty worthless for lung tumors, in my baised opinion.0 -
You definitely want the CT scan or PET scan. The mets have to get to be a certain size before showing up on x-ray. It's just an insurance game to do x-rays- they are not worth it for following for possible mets. There is some concern regarding the frequency of CT or PET scans and the amount of radiation received. This is going to be more of a concern the younger you are. I don't know if there is any answer yet regarding the amount of radiation that is acceptable.
****0 -
Patrusha and **** -- Thank you very much as well. I am so happy that I asked. I really think I will stick to the yearly CT...But I am certainly making plans for the CT rather than the x-ray. Actually, I made the call this morning! Patrusha, I am So sorry for your sister that anything was found. And, ****...As for age and radiation, I don't feel 49 at all; but I'll risk a little to save me in the future? Thank you again, and all the best to you both - Mauravinny3 said:You definitely want the CT scan or PET scan. The mets have to get to be a certain size before showing up on x-ray. It's just an insurance game to do x-rays- they are not worth it for following for possible mets. There is some concern regarding the frequency of CT or PET scans and the amount of radiation received. This is going to be more of a concern the younger you are. I don't know if there is any answer yet regarding the amount of radiation that is acceptable.
****0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.8K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 309 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 397 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.4K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 792 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 237 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 61 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.5K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 538 Sarcoma
- 730 Skin Cancer
- 653 Stomach Cancer
- 191 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.8K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards