Well I've seen the radiology-oncologist (RO) and also 'conversed' via telephone and text after a 'team meeting'. The upshot of it all is that the measurements are STABLE (a good thing) and this whole exercise merely seems to prove how very hit or miss (even meaningless?) these measurements are (a bad thing) !!
RO said over the phone that the chief radiologist had 'looked back' and reviewed the films and that Fuss was currently 12mm and had not changed. However, having been told that it was 9mm in 2012, and at that point reportedly had not changed since seen on film in 2009, I wondered which particular years had actually been reviewed.
Text messages followed:
Me: Sorry to be a pain but it was the 2009 film?
RO: No I think 2010.
Me: First actual report 2012 but was on 2009 film. That is why I wanted to clarify.
RO: We looked at the films. In any case no real change. It's good news.
RO is now definitely a bit huffy that I should continue to wonder why there should be a 3mm difference between the 2009/2012 measurement and the 2014/2015 measurement.
But "no real change" and "it's good news" ........ IN OTHER WORDS SHUT UP.
Wednesday, 18 February 2015
Wednesday, 4 February 2015
It seems from the MRI result that Fuss may have grown 3 or 4 millimetres since January 2013, according to my radio-oncologist. However, she does not seem concerned about it so this measurement may be of no significance ..............,