You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
CT scan in place of yearly x-rays?
- Thread starter amber682
- Start date
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>BaylorCrew07</b></i>
This is really interesting...I've only had 1 lung x-ray (ONE!) and 1 contrast CT scan - both upon being diagnosed w/ CF 6 years ago. About a year after the xray/CT, I asked if I was due for another one, and my doctor told me they only do xrays if there is a problem, or they suspect something is wrong, in order to avoid too much unnecessary radiation, since we'll be having them done a lot throughout our lives.
Do most clinics do yearly xrays??</end quote></div>
we do x ray during annual check up to see the progression of the desease. When my dd cultured PA last year we even did them more frequently.
This is really interesting...I've only had 1 lung x-ray (ONE!) and 1 contrast CT scan - both upon being diagnosed w/ CF 6 years ago. About a year after the xray/CT, I asked if I was due for another one, and my doctor told me they only do xrays if there is a problem, or they suspect something is wrong, in order to avoid too much unnecessary radiation, since we'll be having them done a lot throughout our lives.
Do most clinics do yearly xrays??</end quote></div>
we do x ray during annual check up to see the progression of the desease. When my dd cultured PA last year we even did them more frequently.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>BaylorCrew07</b></i>
This is really interesting...I've only had 1 lung x-ray (ONE!) and 1 contrast CT scan - both upon being diagnosed w/ CF 6 years ago. About a year after the xray/CT, I asked if I was due for another one, and my doctor told me they only do xrays if there is a problem, or they suspect something is wrong, in order to avoid too much unnecessary radiation, since we'll be having them done a lot throughout our lives.
Do most clinics do yearly xrays??</end quote>
we do x ray during annual check up to see the progression of the desease. When my dd cultured PA last year we even did them more frequently.
This is really interesting...I've only had 1 lung x-ray (ONE!) and 1 contrast CT scan - both upon being diagnosed w/ CF 6 years ago. About a year after the xray/CT, I asked if I was due for another one, and my doctor told me they only do xrays if there is a problem, or they suspect something is wrong, in order to avoid too much unnecessary radiation, since we'll be having them done a lot throughout our lives.
Do most clinics do yearly xrays??</end quote>
we do x ray during annual check up to see the progression of the desease. When my dd cultured PA last year we even did them more frequently.
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>BaylorCrew07</b></i>
<br />
<br />This is really interesting...I've only had 1 lung x-ray (ONE!) and 1 contrast CT scan - both upon being diagnosed w/ CF 6 years ago. About a year after the xray/CT, I asked if I was due for another one, and my doctor told me they only do xrays if there is a problem, or they suspect something is wrong, in order to avoid too much unnecessary radiation, since we'll be having them done a lot throughout our lives.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Do most clinics do yearly xrays??</end quote>
<br />
<br />we do x ray during annual check up to see the progression of the desease. When my dd cultured PA last year we even did them more frequently.
<br />
<br />
<br />This is really interesting...I've only had 1 lung x-ray (ONE!) and 1 contrast CT scan - both upon being diagnosed w/ CF 6 years ago. About a year after the xray/CT, I asked if I was due for another one, and my doctor told me they only do xrays if there is a problem, or they suspect something is wrong, in order to avoid too much unnecessary radiation, since we'll be having them done a lot throughout our lives.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Do most clinics do yearly xrays??</end quote>
<br />
<br />we do x ray during annual check up to see the progression of the desease. When my dd cultured PA last year we even did them more frequently.
<br />
ct scans every other year seems extreme to me. I'd be worried about the extra radiation if it is not really needed. I've read before that a ct scan is equivalent to several hundred xrays. I'd ask the question what would the ct scan show that would change treatment that an xray would not? In other words, how is doing all these ct scans going to keep my child healthier compared to doing xrays? I can understand doing an xray and if the xray showed something that then needed further investigation to then do a ct scan.
ct scans every other year seems extreme to me. I'd be worried about the extra radiation if it is not really needed. I've read before that a ct scan is equivalent to several hundred xrays. I'd ask the question what would the ct scan show that would change treatment that an xray would not? In other words, how is doing all these ct scans going to keep my child healthier compared to doing xrays? I can understand doing an xray and if the xray showed something that then needed further investigation to then do a ct scan.
ct scans every other year seems extreme to me. I'd be worried about the extra radiation if it is not really needed. I've read before that a ct scan is equivalent to several hundred xrays. I'd ask the question what would the ct scan show that would change treatment that an xray would not? In other words, how is doing all these ct scans going to keep my child healthier compared to doing xrays? I can understand doing an xray and if the xray showed something that then needed further investigation to then do a ct scan.
theLostMiler
New member
I do CT scans more regularly than x-rays, but I think that is b/c of my M. Abscessus (I think its easier to see the progression in a CT b/c of the rings or whatever).My doctors try to order regular x-rays (every year at least, or every 6 or so months) and do try to stay away from CT if possible.
I am surprised by doing CT scans that often b/c they are bad (I just read an article within a few months that talked about how dr.s are over prescribing CT scans). X-rays they said aren't actually too terribly bad if I remember right, but CT scans def build up.
The sucky part is, I get CT scans with every bowel issue as well. I think the article said something about having 5 CT scans before you turned 40 was bad... Im way over that at 22... and all of them have been since probably only being 18 or 19.
PS: Dont google it b/c the intro topics are a little scary. I cant refind my article, but I found my FB post about it from June and it compares CT scans to radiation from those near an atomic bomb... I remember it comparing the units of radiology of the x-ray to a CT to the atomic bomb etc.
one article I said said 'normal' CT scan is like getting 500 x-rays.
Edited:
Also I remember the article talking about regular strength or standard CTs vs. high def CTs (another big difference... had one of those on accident once).
And it talked about the CT scans being worse if done closer together. For me, that is bad news b/c I tend to get a group of CT scans like w/ the BO its like one or two upon admission, then I get my lung ones... Im about to get my first ever sinus one (luckily I haven't had to get one before this, but hoping no problems b/c thats another reason to get CT scans).
Unfortunately for us its hard to bypass the x-ray or CT scan... for other things, MRI's and ultrashounds work just fine at least preliminaryily and if something is noticed, then do the CT scan, but doing the MRI or ultrasound first is way beneficial for a ton of people.
I am surprised by doing CT scans that often b/c they are bad (I just read an article within a few months that talked about how dr.s are over prescribing CT scans). X-rays they said aren't actually too terribly bad if I remember right, but CT scans def build up.
The sucky part is, I get CT scans with every bowel issue as well. I think the article said something about having 5 CT scans before you turned 40 was bad... Im way over that at 22... and all of them have been since probably only being 18 or 19.
PS: Dont google it b/c the intro topics are a little scary. I cant refind my article, but I found my FB post about it from June and it compares CT scans to radiation from those near an atomic bomb... I remember it comparing the units of radiology of the x-ray to a CT to the atomic bomb etc.
one article I said said 'normal' CT scan is like getting 500 x-rays.
Edited:
Also I remember the article talking about regular strength or standard CTs vs. high def CTs (another big difference... had one of those on accident once).
And it talked about the CT scans being worse if done closer together. For me, that is bad news b/c I tend to get a group of CT scans like w/ the BO its like one or two upon admission, then I get my lung ones... Im about to get my first ever sinus one (luckily I haven't had to get one before this, but hoping no problems b/c thats another reason to get CT scans).
Unfortunately for us its hard to bypass the x-ray or CT scan... for other things, MRI's and ultrashounds work just fine at least preliminaryily and if something is noticed, then do the CT scan, but doing the MRI or ultrasound first is way beneficial for a ton of people.
theLostMiler
New member
I do CT scans more regularly than x-rays, but I think that is b/c of my M. Abscessus (I think its easier to see the progression in a CT b/c of the rings or whatever).My doctors try to order regular x-rays (every year at least, or every 6 or so months) and do try to stay away from CT if possible.
I am surprised by doing CT scans that often b/c they are bad (I just read an article within a few months that talked about how dr.s are over prescribing CT scans). X-rays they said aren't actually too terribly bad if I remember right, but CT scans def build up.
The sucky part is, I get CT scans with every bowel issue as well. I think the article said something about having 5 CT scans before you turned 40 was bad... Im way over that at 22... and all of them have been since probably only being 18 or 19.
PS: Dont google it b/c the intro topics are a little scary. I cant refind my article, but I found my FB post about it from June and it compares CT scans to radiation from those near an atomic bomb... I remember it comparing the units of radiology of the x-ray to a CT to the atomic bomb etc.
one article I said said 'normal' CT scan is like getting 500 x-rays.
Edited:
Also I remember the article talking about regular strength or standard CTs vs. high def CTs (another big difference... had one of those on accident once).
And it talked about the CT scans being worse if done closer together. For me, that is bad news b/c I tend to get a group of CT scans like w/ the BO its like one or two upon admission, then I get my lung ones... Im about to get my first ever sinus one (luckily I haven't had to get one before this, but hoping no problems b/c thats another reason to get CT scans).
Unfortunately for us its hard to bypass the x-ray or CT scan... for other things, MRI's and ultrashounds work just fine at least preliminaryily and if something is noticed, then do the CT scan, but doing the MRI or ultrasound first is way beneficial for a ton of people.
I am surprised by doing CT scans that often b/c they are bad (I just read an article within a few months that talked about how dr.s are over prescribing CT scans). X-rays they said aren't actually too terribly bad if I remember right, but CT scans def build up.
The sucky part is, I get CT scans with every bowel issue as well. I think the article said something about having 5 CT scans before you turned 40 was bad... Im way over that at 22... and all of them have been since probably only being 18 or 19.
PS: Dont google it b/c the intro topics are a little scary. I cant refind my article, but I found my FB post about it from June and it compares CT scans to radiation from those near an atomic bomb... I remember it comparing the units of radiology of the x-ray to a CT to the atomic bomb etc.
one article I said said 'normal' CT scan is like getting 500 x-rays.
Edited:
Also I remember the article talking about regular strength or standard CTs vs. high def CTs (another big difference... had one of those on accident once).
And it talked about the CT scans being worse if done closer together. For me, that is bad news b/c I tend to get a group of CT scans like w/ the BO its like one or two upon admission, then I get my lung ones... Im about to get my first ever sinus one (luckily I haven't had to get one before this, but hoping no problems b/c thats another reason to get CT scans).
Unfortunately for us its hard to bypass the x-ray or CT scan... for other things, MRI's and ultrashounds work just fine at least preliminaryily and if something is noticed, then do the CT scan, but doing the MRI or ultrasound first is way beneficial for a ton of people.
theLostMiler
New member
I do CT scans more regularly than x-rays, but I think that is b/c of my M. Abscessus (I think its easier to see the progression in a CT b/c of the rings or whatever).My doctors try to order regular x-rays (every year at least, or every 6 or so months) and do try to stay away from CT if possible.
<br />
<br />I am surprised by doing CT scans that often b/c they are bad (I just read an article within a few months that talked about how dr.s are over prescribing CT scans). X-rays they said aren't actually too terribly bad if I remember right, but CT scans def build up.
<br />
<br />The sucky part is, I get CT scans with every bowel issue as well. I think the article said something about having 5 CT scans before you turned 40 was bad... Im way over that at 22... and all of them have been since probably only being 18 or 19.
<br />
<br />PS: Dont google it b/c the intro topics are a little scary. I cant refind my article, but I found my FB post about it from June and it compares CT scans to radiation from those near an atomic bomb... I remember it comparing the units of radiology of the x-ray to a CT to the atomic bomb etc.
<br />
<br />one article I said said 'normal' CT scan is like getting 500 x-rays.
<br />
<br />
<br />Edited:
<br />
<br />Also I remember the article talking about regular strength or standard CTs vs. high def CTs (another big difference... had one of those on accident once).
<br />
<br />And it talked about the CT scans being worse if done closer together. For me, that is bad news b/c I tend to get a group of CT scans like w/ the BO its like one or two upon admission, then I get my lung ones... Im about to get my first ever sinus one (luckily I haven't had to get one before this, but hoping no problems b/c thats another reason to get CT scans).
<br />
<br />Unfortunately for us its hard to bypass the x-ray or CT scan... for other things, MRI's and ultrashounds work just fine at least preliminaryily and if something is noticed, then do the CT scan, but doing the MRI or ultrasound first is way beneficial for a ton of people.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />I am surprised by doing CT scans that often b/c they are bad (I just read an article within a few months that talked about how dr.s are over prescribing CT scans). X-rays they said aren't actually too terribly bad if I remember right, but CT scans def build up.
<br />
<br />The sucky part is, I get CT scans with every bowel issue as well. I think the article said something about having 5 CT scans before you turned 40 was bad... Im way over that at 22... and all of them have been since probably only being 18 or 19.
<br />
<br />PS: Dont google it b/c the intro topics are a little scary. I cant refind my article, but I found my FB post about it from June and it compares CT scans to radiation from those near an atomic bomb... I remember it comparing the units of radiology of the x-ray to a CT to the atomic bomb etc.
<br />
<br />one article I said said 'normal' CT scan is like getting 500 x-rays.
<br />
<br />
<br />Edited:
<br />
<br />Also I remember the article talking about regular strength or standard CTs vs. high def CTs (another big difference... had one of those on accident once).
<br />
<br />And it talked about the CT scans being worse if done closer together. For me, that is bad news b/c I tend to get a group of CT scans like w/ the BO its like one or two upon admission, then I get my lung ones... Im about to get my first ever sinus one (luckily I haven't had to get one before this, but hoping no problems b/c thats another reason to get CT scans).
<br />
<br />Unfortunately for us its hard to bypass the x-ray or CT scan... for other things, MRI's and ultrashounds work just fine at least preliminaryily and if something is noticed, then do the CT scan, but doing the MRI or ultrasound first is way beneficial for a ton of people.
<br />
<br />
T
TonyaH
Guest
I agree with LostMiler...Andrew had his first CT scan last week. His annual appointment was about a month ago and at that time he had his annual x-ray. That x-ray did not show any problems. However, his pfts were down and he had been coughing alot. So, his doctor admitted him to treat his pseudomonas. While we were in the hospital his cultures came back growing mycobacterium abscessus. So, after his three weeks of ivs for pseudo, we went back to clinic for follow up and had a ct scan before the picc was pulled.
Well, the myco showed up throughout his lungs. The doctors said that with the amount of infection present, it must have been growing for months at least. Yet, three weeks earlier his x-rays showed no problems aside from his baseline bronchiectasis. Oh, and the CT scan showed more progressed bronchiectasis as well.
So, there is no doubt that a CT scan is a much better diagnostic tool. The question is, do you take the risk vs. the benefit? I can honestly say, even going through all of this now, that I would rather use a CT scan sparingly than subject Andrew to that much radiation on a routine basis. It's like bronchoscopies. They are a much better diagnostic tool than a throat culture, but should not be done routinely do to the risks.
Well, the myco showed up throughout his lungs. The doctors said that with the amount of infection present, it must have been growing for months at least. Yet, three weeks earlier his x-rays showed no problems aside from his baseline bronchiectasis. Oh, and the CT scan showed more progressed bronchiectasis as well.
So, there is no doubt that a CT scan is a much better diagnostic tool. The question is, do you take the risk vs. the benefit? I can honestly say, even going through all of this now, that I would rather use a CT scan sparingly than subject Andrew to that much radiation on a routine basis. It's like bronchoscopies. They are a much better diagnostic tool than a throat culture, but should not be done routinely do to the risks.
T
TonyaH
Guest
I agree with LostMiler...Andrew had his first CT scan last week. His annual appointment was about a month ago and at that time he had his annual x-ray. That x-ray did not show any problems. However, his pfts were down and he had been coughing alot. So, his doctor admitted him to treat his pseudomonas. While we were in the hospital his cultures came back growing mycobacterium abscessus. So, after his three weeks of ivs for pseudo, we went back to clinic for follow up and had a ct scan before the picc was pulled.
Well, the myco showed up throughout his lungs. The doctors said that with the amount of infection present, it must have been growing for months at least. Yet, three weeks earlier his x-rays showed no problems aside from his baseline bronchiectasis. Oh, and the CT scan showed more progressed bronchiectasis as well.
So, there is no doubt that a CT scan is a much better diagnostic tool. The question is, do you take the risk vs. the benefit? I can honestly say, even going through all of this now, that I would rather use a CT scan sparingly than subject Andrew to that much radiation on a routine basis. It's like bronchoscopies. They are a much better diagnostic tool than a throat culture, but should not be done routinely do to the risks.
Well, the myco showed up throughout his lungs. The doctors said that with the amount of infection present, it must have been growing for months at least. Yet, three weeks earlier his x-rays showed no problems aside from his baseline bronchiectasis. Oh, and the CT scan showed more progressed bronchiectasis as well.
So, there is no doubt that a CT scan is a much better diagnostic tool. The question is, do you take the risk vs. the benefit? I can honestly say, even going through all of this now, that I would rather use a CT scan sparingly than subject Andrew to that much radiation on a routine basis. It's like bronchoscopies. They are a much better diagnostic tool than a throat culture, but should not be done routinely do to the risks.
T
TonyaH
Guest
I agree with LostMiler...Andrew had his first CT scan last week. His annual appointment was about a month ago and at that time he had his annual x-ray. That x-ray did not show any problems. However, his pfts were down and he had been coughing alot. So, his doctor admitted him to treat his pseudomonas. While we were in the hospital his cultures came back growing mycobacterium abscessus. So, after his three weeks of ivs for pseudo, we went back to clinic for follow up and had a ct scan before the picc was pulled.
<br />
<br />Well, the myco showed up throughout his lungs. The doctors said that with the amount of infection present, it must have been growing for months at least. Yet, three weeks earlier his x-rays showed no problems aside from his baseline bronchiectasis. Oh, and the CT scan showed more progressed bronchiectasis as well.
<br />
<br />So, there is no doubt that a CT scan is a much better diagnostic tool. The question is, do you take the risk vs. the benefit? I can honestly say, even going through all of this now, that I would rather use a CT scan sparingly than subject Andrew to that much radiation on a routine basis. It's like bronchoscopies. They are a much better diagnostic tool than a throat culture, but should not be done routinely do to the risks.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Well, the myco showed up throughout his lungs. The doctors said that with the amount of infection present, it must have been growing for months at least. Yet, three weeks earlier his x-rays showed no problems aside from his baseline bronchiectasis. Oh, and the CT scan showed more progressed bronchiectasis as well.
<br />
<br />So, there is no doubt that a CT scan is a much better diagnostic tool. The question is, do you take the risk vs. the benefit? I can honestly say, even going through all of this now, that I would rather use a CT scan sparingly than subject Andrew to that much radiation on a routine basis. It's like bronchoscopies. They are a much better diagnostic tool than a throat culture, but should not be done routinely do to the risks.
<br />
<br />
lindsleyfamily
New member
Hi All:
Three years ago our clinic moved from annual xrays to CT scans(at least for my kids) every 3 years. The time between CT scans may be dependant on how involved the lungs are. My kids have almost no lung involvement to date. Their doctor said that they could see lung "damage" in such minute detail with CT scans that xrays might not pick it up until a year or two later. At first, I was nervous when they said they would not be doing routine annual xrays but they have been healthy and I know our Docs would invetigate with all available diagnostic test if they had come down with anything. This winter will be their 2nd CT scan and it will be interesting to see if there is any change in the scans.
Three years ago our clinic moved from annual xrays to CT scans(at least for my kids) every 3 years. The time between CT scans may be dependant on how involved the lungs are. My kids have almost no lung involvement to date. Their doctor said that they could see lung "damage" in such minute detail with CT scans that xrays might not pick it up until a year or two later. At first, I was nervous when they said they would not be doing routine annual xrays but they have been healthy and I know our Docs would invetigate with all available diagnostic test if they had come down with anything. This winter will be their 2nd CT scan and it will be interesting to see if there is any change in the scans.
lindsleyfamily
New member
Hi All:
Three years ago our clinic moved from annual xrays to CT scans(at least for my kids) every 3 years. The time between CT scans may be dependant on how involved the lungs are. My kids have almost no lung involvement to date. Their doctor said that they could see lung "damage" in such minute detail with CT scans that xrays might not pick it up until a year or two later. At first, I was nervous when they said they would not be doing routine annual xrays but they have been healthy and I know our Docs would invetigate with all available diagnostic test if they had come down with anything. This winter will be their 2nd CT scan and it will be interesting to see if there is any change in the scans.
Three years ago our clinic moved from annual xrays to CT scans(at least for my kids) every 3 years. The time between CT scans may be dependant on how involved the lungs are. My kids have almost no lung involvement to date. Their doctor said that they could see lung "damage" in such minute detail with CT scans that xrays might not pick it up until a year or two later. At first, I was nervous when they said they would not be doing routine annual xrays but they have been healthy and I know our Docs would invetigate with all available diagnostic test if they had come down with anything. This winter will be their 2nd CT scan and it will be interesting to see if there is any change in the scans.
lindsleyfamily
New member
Hi All:
<br />Three years ago our clinic moved from annual xrays to CT scans(at least for my kids) every 3 years. The time between CT scans may be dependant on how involved the lungs are. My kids have almost no lung involvement to date. Their doctor said that they could see lung "damage" in such minute detail with CT scans that xrays might not pick it up until a year or two later. At first, I was nervous when they said they would not be doing routine annual xrays but they have been healthy and I know our Docs would invetigate with all available diagnostic test if they had come down with anything. This winter will be their 2nd CT scan and it will be interesting to see if there is any change in the scans.
<br />Three years ago our clinic moved from annual xrays to CT scans(at least for my kids) every 3 years. The time between CT scans may be dependant on how involved the lungs are. My kids have almost no lung involvement to date. Their doctor said that they could see lung "damage" in such minute detail with CT scans that xrays might not pick it up until a year or two later. At first, I was nervous when they said they would not be doing routine annual xrays but they have been healthy and I know our Docs would invetigate with all available diagnostic test if they had come down with anything. This winter will be their 2nd CT scan and it will be interesting to see if there is any change in the scans.
Thank you everyone for the replies! I'm pretty sure they said they would be doing CT scans every 2 years, but I'll double check. It tends to get hectic with 2 little ones at a clinic appt! I am uneasy with the idea of CT scans that often, but am glad to get this first one. I will talk to them about it more Sept 1st when we go back. I will be sure to update!
Thank you everyone for the replies! I'm pretty sure they said they would be doing CT scans every 2 years, but I'll double check. It tends to get hectic with 2 little ones at a clinic appt! I am uneasy with the idea of CT scans that often, but am glad to get this first one. I will talk to them about it more Sept 1st when we go back. I will be sure to update!
Thank you everyone for the replies! I'm pretty sure they said they would be doing CT scans every 2 years, but I'll double check. It tends to get hectic with 2 little ones at a clinic appt! I am uneasy with the idea of CT scans that often, but am glad to get this first one. I will talk to them about it more Sept 1st when we go back. I will be sure to update!