Troubling PET scan report

Posted by fwpoole @fwpoole, Sep 10 3:51pm

Im two years out from "successful" chemo to treat NHL. Just got a PET scan on my oncologist request and was looking at the report. One thing that stands out is the line that states:
"New markedly FDG avid mass in the lingual tonsils and epiglottis region with an SUV max of 12.1".
I have yet to get in to see my Dr so until I do, I'm wondering what does this mean and should I be worried?

Hi @fwpoole, it can be so nerve-wracking to get the results of scans in advance of meeting with your oncologist, especially going into a weekend.

I'm not qualified to interpret the report. But I can share that FDG-PET scan stands for: fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET). The role of this procedure is to detect metabolic activity. SUV means standardized uptake value.

As this blog post explains "But for many patients and their loved ones, the complexity of an FDG PET scan can make the experience of getting one confusing and challenging to navigate."
– Understanding Your FDG PET Scan https://www.docpanel.com/blog/post/understanding-your-fdg-pet-scan

You asked "should I be worried?" I imagine it is hard not to worry. As they say – don't borrow from tomorrow's worry. Only your oncologist can properly interpret the complete results of the PET scan together with other tests that you've had or will have.

Are you able to send a message through your patient portal that you're concerned?

REPLY

@colleenyoung , than you for the link to the blog post. it does contain some useful information but, overall, it appears to be a blatant attempt to get me to sign up for an unsolicited second opinion when I haven't even had a first opinion, yet. I'm sure this second opinion is accompanied by a hefty fee which I doubt is covered by Medicare.

After having a baseball sized tumor removed and undergoing chemo two years ago, of course I'm concerned about my PET scan results. But I don't appreciate the attempt to prey on the worried for an unsolicited "second opinion" from some unknown internet doctor. Thanks but no thanks.

REPLY
@fwpoole

@colleenyoung , than you for the link to the blog post. it does contain some useful information but, overall, it appears to be a blatant attempt to get me to sign up for an unsolicited second opinion when I haven't even had a first opinion, yet. I'm sure this second opinion is accompanied by a hefty fee which I doubt is covered by Medicare.

After having a baseball sized tumor removed and undergoing chemo two years ago, of course I'm concerned about my PET scan results. But I don't appreciate the attempt to prey on the worried for an unsolicited "second opinion" from some unknown internet doctor. Thanks but no thanks.

Jump to this post

Oh man, @fwpoole. You're right. That website is really pushing their services. I was focusing on the plain language explanation of the FDG PET scan, which the article does very well.

As I suggested in my original message, only your oncologist can properly interpret the complete results of the PET scan together with other tests that you've had or will have.

Were you able send a message to your oncologist or call to make an appointment?

REPLY
@colleenyoung

Oh man, @fwpoole. You're right. That website is really pushing their services. I was focusing on the plain language explanation of the FDG PET scan, which the article does very well.

As I suggested in my original message, only your oncologist can properly interpret the complete results of the PET scan together with other tests that you've had or will have.

Were you able send a message to your oncologist or call to make an appointment?

Jump to this post

Ive made a call to my onc and waiting a call back for next steps. Thanks

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.