› Forums › General Melanoma Community › hoping for stage 1 false alarm
- This topic has 16 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
lhaley.
- Post
-
- September 28, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Some of you may have seen me post before about a lump in my mouth.The dentist found nothing to explain it, or the symptoms. (Dry down the side of my throat is one of them.) Today the Doctor ordered a rush ultrasound, (wrote tumour on the request form – so certain of himself the bugger) I tried to get him to reassure me, (he is a nice man, really!) but when I asked if it could still be something non cancerous he would only say I was to come in anytime the day after the ultrasound. And he put me off work.
Some of you may have seen me post before about a lump in my mouth.The dentist found nothing to explain it, or the symptoms. (Dry down the side of my throat is one of them.) Today the Doctor ordered a rush ultrasound, (wrote tumour on the request form – so certain of himself the bugger) I tried to get him to reassure me, (he is a nice man, really!) but when I asked if it could still be something non cancerous he would only say I was to come in anytime the day after the ultrasound. And he put me off work. I still had my composure at this point, after all, it could be nothing ( I read about zebras here all the time). But the hospital called a short while ago, it seems the radiologist upgraded me to a soft palate CT tomorrow. Needless to say I have the jitters- at least I don't have long to wait to find out what's going on.
- Replies
-
-
- September 29, 2010 at 3:42 am
Wishing you the best.
We all want our Drs. to reassure us but they also don't want to mislead us. I have been reassured before and it ended up being melanoma, I felt as if I had been slapped down. I've also been told that they were sure something was melanoma and it wasn't. I'd rather the Dr. just wait and tell me after he has the results. Also, the Dr. had to write what his suspicions are so the radiologist can be on the same wave length and know what to look for.
Let us know what you find out!
Linda
-
- September 29, 2010 at 3:42 am
Wishing you the best.
We all want our Drs. to reassure us but they also don't want to mislead us. I have been reassured before and it ended up being melanoma, I felt as if I had been slapped down. I've also been told that they were sure something was melanoma and it wasn't. I'd rather the Dr. just wait and tell me after he has the results. Also, the Dr. had to write what his suspicions are so the radiologist can be on the same wave length and know what to look for.
Let us know what you find out!
Linda
-
- September 29, 2010 at 11:22 am
Linda is absolutely right. Most drs don't want to say anything until they get test results back, so he was just being neutral. It's tough to stay calm so don't. Just get some exercise and accept the anxiety until you know more. Thank goodness you don't have to wait long and please post when you can.
-
- September 29, 2010 at 11:22 am
Linda is absolutely right. Most drs don't want to say anything until they get test results back, so he was just being neutral. It's tough to stay calm so don't. Just get some exercise and accept the anxiety until you know more. Thank goodness you don't have to wait long and please post when you can.
-
- September 30, 2010 at 8:06 pm
Got my CT results and have copied a portion below – lots of good stuff here – I am very relieved they found no obvious evidence of cancer. But we still need to look harder (and we need to resolve the symptoms so I can go back to work) so I am being referred to an ear nose and throat specialist for an urgent biopsy. ( Doc's secretary is phoning them all up as I type:)
However, the radiologist's comment about the CT makes me wonder if an ultrasound would have more accurately seen what is going on ….does anyone think I should request an ultrasound before a biopsy?
And thanks everyone for the support -it really helps to write down my fears and get your feedback. ( I am not bringing family along for this scare.. not yet anyway.)
CT nasopharynx with contrast.
Findings: The soft palate is minimally prominent measuring up to 9mm in thickness compared to about 6mm on the prior cervical CT soft tissue reformat in the sagittal plane. However , no more focal mass lesion is identified and no surface nodule is seen. No cervical adenopathy is detected. No large pharyngeal lesion is seen.
Impression: I understand from viewing the history, that the patient has a known tumour of the soft palate. The soft palate is somewhat more thickened than precious, although a discrete tumour is not identified. CT may not be as sensitive to a more diffuse lesion or to a lesion entirely confined to the mucosa.
There is no evidence of adenopathy.
(Previous CT was of cervical spine april 14 2010)
-
- September 30, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Under the impression part , the radiologist said that you had a past history of a tumor in the soft palate area, when was that?
When 3 of my latest areas were biopsied they were all done while being guided by an ultra sound to get to the center. Not sure if that ultra sound is diagnostic or not but they will be able to clearly see where they are going to go into the center of the area.
You will not have the results when they do the biopsy!! Sometimes though it is good to let the family know what is going on. My son's wife told me 4 years ago that I need to be honest with my son and let him know every step what is going on so he could accept things as they happened. I have taken her advice and he truly understands now.
Best wishes let us know when your biospy is scheduled,
Linda
-
- September 30, 2010 at 9:16 pm
Hi Linda, thanks.. a guided biopsy sounds much more appealing than what I was imagining. (I'm a little jaded about mouth stuff.. once had a dentist dig around for ages looking for a wisdom tooth.. I was frozen, a kid and wondered if he had found a problem with the previous weeks surgery to remove the right side teeth; this was left side week! – Never go late on a Friday that's all I can say:)
And I agree, that mention of a past history is odd – but since this is my first lump, I think it might be a way of saying ok, you say you saw a bump – but I can't find a reason. And I do see some recent thickening ..so look some other way.
What it does not say is which method is preferred. I will have to read up on the diagnostic powers of an ultrasound.
But Linda, this comment has me confused..
You will not have the results when they do the biopsy!!
-
- September 30, 2010 at 11:35 pm
Sorry, I meant that don't expect he results immediately. Depending on the hospital that is reading the pathology it will take anywhere from 1 day to a week. My biopsy in my arm took 7 excrutiating days, my lymph node and thyroid was done somewhere else and I got the results the next day.
Linda
-
- September 30, 2010 at 11:35 pm
Sorry, I meant that don't expect he results immediately. Depending on the hospital that is reading the pathology it will take anywhere from 1 day to a week. My biopsy in my arm took 7 excrutiating days, my lymph node and thyroid was done somewhere else and I got the results the next day.
Linda
-
- September 30, 2010 at 9:16 pm
Hi Linda, thanks.. a guided biopsy sounds much more appealing than what I was imagining. (I'm a little jaded about mouth stuff.. once had a dentist dig around for ages looking for a wisdom tooth.. I was frozen, a kid and wondered if he had found a problem with the previous weeks surgery to remove the right side teeth; this was left side week! – Never go late on a Friday that's all I can say:)
And I agree, that mention of a past history is odd – but since this is my first lump, I think it might be a way of saying ok, you say you saw a bump – but I can't find a reason. And I do see some recent thickening ..so look some other way.
What it does not say is which method is preferred. I will have to read up on the diagnostic powers of an ultrasound.
But Linda, this comment has me confused..
You will not have the results when they do the biopsy!!
-
- September 30, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Under the impression part , the radiologist said that you had a past history of a tumor in the soft palate area, when was that?
When 3 of my latest areas were biopsied they were all done while being guided by an ultra sound to get to the center. Not sure if that ultra sound is diagnostic or not but they will be able to clearly see where they are going to go into the center of the area.
You will not have the results when they do the biopsy!! Sometimes though it is good to let the family know what is going on. My son's wife told me 4 years ago that I need to be honest with my son and let him know every step what is going on so he could accept things as they happened. I have taken her advice and he truly understands now.
Best wishes let us know when your biospy is scheduled,
Linda
-
- September 30, 2010 at 8:06 pm
Got my CT results and have copied a portion below – lots of good stuff here – I am very relieved they found no obvious evidence of cancer. But we still need to look harder (and we need to resolve the symptoms so I can go back to work) so I am being referred to an ear nose and throat specialist for an urgent biopsy. ( Doc's secretary is phoning them all up as I type:)
However, the radiologist's comment about the CT makes me wonder if an ultrasound would have more accurately seen what is going on ….does anyone think I should request an ultrasound before a biopsy?
And thanks everyone for the support -it really helps to write down my fears and get your feedback. ( I am not bringing family along for this scare.. not yet anyway.)
CT nasopharynx with contrast.
Findings: The soft palate is minimally prominent measuring up to 9mm in thickness compared to about 6mm on the prior cervical CT soft tissue reformat in the sagittal plane. However , no more focal mass lesion is identified and no surface nodule is seen. No cervical adenopathy is detected. No large pharyngeal lesion is seen.
Impression: I understand from viewing the history, that the patient has a known tumour of the soft palate. The soft palate is somewhat more thickened than precious, although a discrete tumour is not identified. CT may not be as sensitive to a more diffuse lesion or to a lesion entirely confined to the mucosa.
There is no evidence of adenopathy.
(Previous CT was of cervical spine april 14 2010)
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.