Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#9530 02-10-2007 01:04 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
LisaB Offline OP
Gold Member (100+ posts)
OP Offline
Gold Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
Hi all,

Seems CT, PET and MRI are used more. Has anyone had an ultra sound for follow ups?

Any info on ultra sounds would be good. What can they show? are they accurate? etc.

Thanks and Take care.


My Dad (Sam) at age 69 dx SCC Base of Tongue T1N2C Well-Diff - March 2006.

35 IMRT rads & 3 Cisplatin chemos - Apr-June/06. Nodes shrunk 50% Dr's suggest ND. Negative PET - he declined ND.

March/07 Had Bilateral ND. No Cancer!! Doing Well!
#9531 02-13-2007 02:51 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
LisaB Offline OP
Gold Member (100+ posts)
OP Offline
Gold Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
Ok to add to my post. The Dr said ultrasound has less radiation and therefore good for close follow up scans.

I heard elsewhere that thick necks can be hard to ultrasound. Anyone else hear this?

How do they compare to CT? Some articles I read say about the same and others say not as accurate. ??

What do you know or have been told or read?

Thanks!


My Dad (Sam) at age 69 dx SCC Base of Tongue T1N2C Well-Diff - March 2006.

35 IMRT rads & 3 Cisplatin chemos - Apr-June/06. Nodes shrunk 50% Dr's suggest ND. Negative PET - he declined ND.

March/07 Had Bilateral ND. No Cancer!! Doing Well!
#9532 02-13-2007 03:25 PM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,552
Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)
Offline
Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,552
Ultrasound has 0 radiation, but MRI's don't have any radiation either, plus their image quality is truly the gold standard of all soft tissue imaging. Ultrasound is grainy and does not have the resolution or exquisite detail of an MRI. CT would be the second highest image quality.

There is no comparison of either CT or MRI to ultrasound, they are the gold standard of diagnostic imaging.

The only typical ultrasound studies, that I am aware of, done on the neck, have to do with calcium scoring of the carotid artery for heart attack risk evaluation. It just doesn't have the resolution for complex structures like the head and neck region and the signals will bounce off of bones as well.

Progress is constantly being made in the area of ultrasound image quality/resolution and I would anticipate that eventually it will emerge as a more mature imaging modality than it is today. Not that it doesn't have many uses already, especially OB/GYN imaging...


Gary Allsebrook
***********************************
Dx 11/22/02, SCC, 6 x 3 cm Polypoid tumor, rt tonsil, Stage III/IVA, T3N0M0 G1/2
Tx 1/28/03 - 3/19/03, Cisplatin ct x2, IMRT, bilateral, with boost, x35(69.96Gy)
________________________________________________________
"You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes" (James 4:14 NIV)
#9533 02-14-2007 05:34 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 199
Me2 Offline
Senior Member (100+ posts)
Offline
Senior Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 199
Lisa - I was treated at MD Anderson and go there for my follow-up exams every 3 months. I am having an ultrasound (soft tissue- neck) as part of my next appt in early March, not a CT. My dr. thinks it's just as good for showing the lymph node system and structures in the neck. Also, on my last appt I had an enlarged lymph node and since it didn't go away, I had an ultrasound here in Georgia to follow up and then an ultrasound with fine needle biopsy. (luckily all negative)

One thing I will say - a lot of this depends on the skill of the US tech, as well. I had my first US done at a different hospital than my second, and it was night and day... My second one was done at a large teaching hospital here and the US tech only did head and neck - and the radiologist was also right there. I think my first one was done by someone who has only ever done OB ultrasounds :-)


Ginny M. SCC of Left lateral tongue Dx 04/06,Surgery MDACC 05/11/06: Partial glossectomy with selective neck dissection. T1N0M0 - no radiation. Phase III clinical trial ("EPOC" trial)04/07 thru 04/08 because tests showed a 65% chance of recurrence. 10 Year Survivor!
#9534 02-14-2007 10:44 AM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,552
Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)
Offline
Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,552
I forgot to mention the ultrasound is used frequently for (fine) Needle Guided Biopsy as well.

It is not listed in the NCCN Oncology Practice Guidelines for either original workup or followup exams for H&N patients.

It would not be an "off label" use for the device though since most US systems are indicated for "small parts". Ideal frequencies for the probes used in the head & neck area would be in the 7Mhz to 24MHz range depending on the depth of the region of interest, the higher frequencies being used for areas close to the skin.

I would add to what Ginny had to say in that there is also a wide variation in the quality of the machines out there as well, everything from inexpensive black & white mechanical sector to phased, linear and curved array, multiple channel, tissue harmonic imaging, 3D/4D (4D meaning 3D with motion), color machines, such as the GE Voluson 730.

There is also a shortage of trained sonographers in the US today. It is a good profession but handling the probes all day, with the pressure required for good coupling, takes it's toll on the operators and technicians. Many suffer from carpal tunnel syndrome and their careers are cut short.


Gary Allsebrook
***********************************
Dx 11/22/02, SCC, 6 x 3 cm Polypoid tumor, rt tonsil, Stage III/IVA, T3N0M0 G1/2
Tx 1/28/03 - 3/19/03, Cisplatin ct x2, IMRT, bilateral, with boost, x35(69.96Gy)
________________________________________________________
"You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes" (James 4:14 NIV)
#9535 02-15-2007 03:40 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
LisaB Offline OP
Gold Member (100+ posts)
OP Offline
Gold Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
Thanks Gary and Ginny,

so with all that being said; do US have more false positives or false negatives?

Thanks again.


My Dad (Sam) at age 69 dx SCC Base of Tongue T1N2C Well-Diff - March 2006.

35 IMRT rads & 3 Cisplatin chemos - Apr-June/06. Nodes shrunk 50% Dr's suggest ND. Negative PET - he declined ND.

March/07 Had Bilateral ND. No Cancer!! Doing Well!
#9536 02-16-2007 04:41 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 199
Me2 Offline
Senior Member (100+ posts)
Offline
Senior Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 199
Lisa - I'm definitely not an expert on this - that's my disclaimer! But I am an RN and I work for Kodak in their health imaging group so have some knowledge.

So, basically my understanding is that there really isn't anything such as "false" positives or negative in US. That's more related to PET scans. Basically, an ultrasound can show the structures very well and a skilled radiologist can tell from the images what the characteristics of any abnormalities look like and make a more informed diagnosis on what the pathology might be. For example, when looking at my US the radiologist dictated "subcentimeter left level 1B lymph node which has benign characteristics. Under the area of palpable concern, there is a 10 mm level 2A lymph node with no suspicious features..."

And, as said before, much of this is determined by the quality of the equipment and the skill of both the sonographer and radiologist. And, in order to make any definitive dx, a biopsy is necessary... but that's the same with CT, MRI or PET...


Ginny M. SCC of Left lateral tongue Dx 04/06,Surgery MDACC 05/11/06: Partial glossectomy with selective neck dissection. T1N0M0 - no radiation. Phase III clinical trial ("EPOC" trial)04/07 thru 04/08 because tests showed a 65% chance of recurrence. 10 Year Survivor!
#9537 02-16-2007 07:01 AM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,552
Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)
Offline
Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,552
Ginny,
I too have worked in ultrasound (and other radiological devices) for many decades (and still am, being VP of an ultrasound manufacturer) and when they (the ultrasound manufacturer's) were attempting to make transrectal US prostate exams the "gold standard" exam, over digital (PSA was still in development then). The death rate went up 5% (due to sepsis), as a result of false positives and unneccessary biopsies. Transrectal prostate screening exams, with US, died a timely death as a result. US is still used for guided biopsy of the prostate but not for screening.

They are using US for breast for follow-up of suspicious areas and regions of interest (ROI). I am not sure that US has the resolution to pick up microcalcifications (which can be the size of a pixel) so I believe that mammograms will continue to be the gold standard.

I honestly have never seen any hard data on this issue (with the exception of transrectal for prostate cancer).

ALL scans are merely a component of the entire diagnostic workup and, as many of us have discovered, far from perfect. All of my first MRI's were terrible and I had much angst as a result until an entire year later when I finally had a "clean" one.

The term "false positive (or negative)" is used far more in conjunction with lab work than anything else. Manufacturer's of lab test reagent, etc. are required to submit extensive clinical data to the FDA concerning the false or negative positive rates and the hemotologist or your doctor typically knows that number.

Scans, on the other hand, are pretty much the responsibility of the reading radiologist and manufacturers are not required to submit data on false or negative results, only basic specifications for the device and indications and limitations for use. It could be rationalized that the false (or negative) postive rate is in the hands of the reading radiologist and that is the reason that congress enacted the Mammography Quality Assurance Act several years ago.

The ACR (American College of Radiology) has done a good job of training radiologists and certification of mammography scanning centers and you be sure that this also has played a role in the improvement of survival rates for breast cancer anyway.

This is also a good time to interject that this is one of the main reasons why we implore people to go to a CCC - the reading radiologists see almost nothing but cancer and are very skilled at reading it as a consequence.

PET is in a space by itself but PET/CT has upped the accuracy considerably.

It has always resorted back to the tried and true - direct visualization, palpation and biopsy if needed.

So there really isn't an answer for LisaB's question.


Gary Allsebrook
***********************************
Dx 11/22/02, SCC, 6 x 3 cm Polypoid tumor, rt tonsil, Stage III/IVA, T3N0M0 G1/2
Tx 1/28/03 - 3/19/03, Cisplatin ct x2, IMRT, bilateral, with boost, x35(69.96Gy)
________________________________________________________
"You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes" (James 4:14 NIV)
#9538 02-17-2007 05:00 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 199
Me2 Offline
Senior Member (100+ posts)
Offline
Senior Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 199
Gary - thanks for sharing all your knowledge - I was very interested to hear what you had to say as I have heard so many different opinions on this topic...

But I think the most important thing you said was regarding why it's so important to go to a CCC - all of my primary treatment has been at MD Anderson and although it's not always easy to do all that travel, not to mention the cost that insurance doesn't cover, I have never regretted that decision. And I saw the difference first hand when I had my first US at a local community hospital and it was a disaster!

Lisa - not sure how much all this discussion has helped you, but hopefully it has given you some additional information on the topic!


Ginny M. SCC of Left lateral tongue Dx 04/06,Surgery MDACC 05/11/06: Partial glossectomy with selective neck dissection. T1N0M0 - no radiation. Phase III clinical trial ("EPOC" trial)04/07 thru 04/08 because tests showed a 65% chance of recurrence. 10 Year Survivor!
#9539 02-17-2007 05:45 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
LisaB Offline OP
Gold Member (100+ posts)
OP Offline
Gold Member (100+ posts)

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 167
Thanks, yes the information has been helpful....and as always confusing ha ha...no one study or one person agrees on the same thing.

It sounds like CT and MRI have the clearer picture. Guess it's hard to say; US vs CT; does one tend to show more inflammation or scar tissue?

Thanks again.

My Dad also goes to a CCC here in Canada (Canada's best). Not sure what type of US they use.


My Dad (Sam) at age 69 dx SCC Base of Tongue T1N2C Well-Diff - March 2006.

35 IMRT rads & 3 Cisplatin chemos - Apr-June/06. Nodes shrunk 50% Dr's suggest ND. Negative PET - he declined ND.

March/07 Had Bilateral ND. No Cancer!! Doing Well!

Link Copied to Clipboard
Top Posters
ChristineB 10,507
davidcpa 8,311
Cheryld 5,260
EzJim 5,260
Brian Hill 4,912
Newest Members
Jina, VintageMel, rahul320, Sean916, Megm37
13,103 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums23
Topics18,166
Posts196,921
Members13,103
Most Online458
Jan 16th, 2020
OCF Awards

Great Nonprofit OCF 2023 Charity Navigator OCF Guidestar Charity OCF

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5