› Forums › General Melanoma Community › Pet Scans
- This topic has 3 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by
Janner.
- Post
-
- August 9, 2012 at 3:59 pm
I had a question about PET scans. I had a very large skin tag (which all my doctors have said looks fine, hasn't changed in years, etc). I did have a PET scan right after being diagnosed with Melanoma. If it were Melanoma – it would have shown up in a PET scan right? Even though it's on the surface of the skin? Not sure how that works sometimes.
I had a question about PET scans. I had a very large skin tag (which all my doctors have said looks fine, hasn't changed in years, etc). I did have a PET scan right after being diagnosed with Melanoma. If it were Melanoma – it would have shown up in a PET scan right? Even though it's on the surface of the skin? Not sure how that works sometimes.
I know my original surgical onc asked if I wanted it removed and I said to just leave it but I think when I see my derm in a week or so I'm going to just get it removed. It seems to be a bit irritated lately (I think between the heat and humidity and Zelboraf). Oh the joys of melanoma!
Thanks!
- Replies
-
-
- August 9, 2012 at 5:44 pm
It depends on the size of the skin tag. Pet scans aren't particularly good with lesions under 1cm. They don't typically detect new primaries or anything like that. You need something of significant size before the PET scan can detect increased metabolic activity. I've had skin tags that haven't really had much blood supply in them – and unless the radioactive isotope can get into the area, nothing will show up on a PET. If it hasn't changed in years, then I personally would go with the skin tag diagnosis. I have a ton of the things – mostly on my abdomen. I rarely give them a second thought.
-
- August 9, 2012 at 5:44 pm
It depends on the size of the skin tag. Pet scans aren't particularly good with lesions under 1cm. They don't typically detect new primaries or anything like that. You need something of significant size before the PET scan can detect increased metabolic activity. I've had skin tags that haven't really had much blood supply in them – and unless the radioactive isotope can get into the area, nothing will show up on a PET. If it hasn't changed in years, then I personally would go with the skin tag diagnosis. I have a ton of the things – mostly on my abdomen. I rarely give them a second thought.
-
- August 9, 2012 at 5:44 pm
It depends on the size of the skin tag. Pet scans aren't particularly good with lesions under 1cm. They don't typically detect new primaries or anything like that. You need something of significant size before the PET scan can detect increased metabolic activity. I've had skin tags that haven't really had much blood supply in them – and unless the radioactive isotope can get into the area, nothing will show up on a PET. If it hasn't changed in years, then I personally would go with the skin tag diagnosis. I have a ton of the things – mostly on my abdomen. I rarely give them a second thought.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.