| |
#4345 11-29-2004 06:32 AM | Joined: Apr 2004 Posts: 50 Supporting Member (50+ posts) | OP  Supporting Member (50+ posts)
Joined: Apr 2004 Posts: 50 | I decided to see MDACC for a second opinon as original Doc was concerned with one of my lymph nodes from review of CAT scan. MDACC review of PetScan (taken late Oct) and CAT scan done at MDACC (early Nov), did not share concern on lymph node but has concern with a "spot" near the original surgery site (May 04). The MDACC Doc wants me back in early Jan for another CAT, and and is not recommending other treatments at this time. So the second opinion was worthwhile, however the divergence in opinion is somewhat disconcerting. Certainly will be going back in Jan. Note that neither Doc has opted for radiation at this juncture.
Best regards,
John | | |
#4346 11-29-2004 09:47 AM | Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,606 Likes: 2 Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts) | | Patient Advocate (old timer, 2000 posts)
Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,606 Likes: 2 | John,
I am glad you opted for a fresh set of eyes to review everything. I am surprised at this point that nobody has mentioned radiation even with the recurrance. I hope everyone looks hard and develops the best possible plan of treatment for you to rid the beast.
Ed
SCC Stage IV, BOT, T2N2bM0
Cisplatin/5FU x 3, 40 days radiation
Diagnosis 07/21/03 tx completed 10/08/03
Post Radiation Lower Motor Neuron Syndrome 3/08.
Cervical Spinal Stenosis 01/11
Cervical Myelitis 09/12
Thoracic Paraplegia 10/12
Dysautonomia 11/12
Hospice care 09/12-01/13.
COPD 01/14
Intermittent CHF 6/15
Feeding tube NPO 03/16
VFI 12/2016
ORN 12/2017
Cardiac Event 06/2018
Bilateral VFI 01/2021
Thoracotomy Bilobectomy 01/2022
Bilateral VFI 05/2022
Total Laryngectomy 01/2023
| | |
#4347 11-29-2004 10:22 AM | Joined: Apr 2004 Posts: 50 Supporting Member (50+ posts) | | OP Supporting Member (50+ posts)
Joined: Apr 2004 Posts: 50 | Ed,
I too am somewhat surprised. MDACC asked several times prior to my visit there if I had had radiation and I fully anticipated they would recommend it. The "spot" has not been confirmed as a recurrance at this juncture, but an "area of concern" that needs to be monitored. I believe and hope that if it was confirmed to be a recurrance that the action taken would be more proactive than follow up. Thanks for your comments.
Best regards,
John | | |
| Forums23 Topics18,253 Posts197,151 Members13,338 | | Most Online1,788
Jan 23rd, 2025 | | |
|
| |
