roadrunner wrote:Many variables are relevant to evaluation of issues like this, e.g., the number of “slices” taken in the scans, the interval between scans, the size of the “lesion”/finding, any changes in the lesion, and any radiologic diagnostic evaluations of the lesion. (For example hepatic hemangiomas often have a very distinctive, reliable radiological profile.) The approach to scans taken by your team may be relevant as well, but if you’re looking for reassurance, the best course is likely to ask your doctors about it. The types of scans used may be irrelevant in the big picture once all of this information is considered. They likely are doing that, and can advise you. If not, your inquiry should prompt the right review of your scans.
Thanks for your answer roadrunner
I have had a couple of issues with the radiodiagnostic team in the past: Yhey missed the liver spot initially only to say later "oh, ok, it was there all along". Also in a previous report they wrote "spleen unremarkable" when I have no spleen.
When I challenged them through my onc they replied something along the lines of "we have a template from which we copy-and-paste and then we put change whatever is relevant"
After that happened I have, in a few occasions, resorted to "second opinion radiologist" in a clinic in another city (to avoid "personal ties") so I send them a DVD with my images and ask them to confirm the diagnostic (this cost me about 250 euros, so I think it is very reasonable)... I will probably do the same this time, just for peace of mind.
Best regards
Javi