keepcalmcarryon wrote:I've created a debate between the intereventional radiologist and thoracic surgeon on one side and my onc on the other.
...YES...got your support team talkin' bout...YOU...never a bad thing.
keepcalmcarryon wrote:So if the nodes in my lungs can be removed now, shouldn't they? And the RFA can be repeated if we miss any.
I'm confused and would appreciate any advice
Many thanks
Sometimes nodes are more "reactive" (-> inflammation/infection/immunological/idiopathic/incidental), than "active"
(->..mets)...SO,docs don't always key in on the nodes...more concerned with WHAT is causing the nodes to be of interest. Also, nodes are considered "normal" structures and by removing them we disrupt the lymphatic system...-> more edema / scarring etc....whereas tumors / mets are NOT normal...so "go for the mets not the nodes" can be one plan of attack.
...Also, some masses (nodes or not) can be in difficult areas where it is best not to do major surgeries, especially if there is a good prospect of improving things with chemo or radiation.
Finally, I have been "inside" on surgeries where we see the tumor and obvious affected tissues ... BUT don't always get a good visual on the "other" structures we are concerned with, despite having all the scans etc....what do you do...keep cutting because you are "concerned"..?
BTDT...based on a surgeon's experience..sometimes you do ...sometimes you don't. The main goal is to have your patient walk out of a successful surgery in the best condition possible when the job is done. Remember this is still only one step on the Journey. I want my patients to have more steps...as a patient I wanna have more steps..... BTDT...on both sides of the surgery table
Having said all the above ...my preference (patient and surgeon) is to cut out all that I can....BUT depends on what I find at the actual time of surgery...may have to change the plans on the fly. JMO.
Cheers and Harmony on the Journey
CRguy