Guest guest Posted August 20, 2001 Report Share Posted August 20, 2001 Hi - The internet is *not* the place to do diagnosing, and a report of a chest x-ray always needs to be interpreted in the context in which it was taken. Meaning: why did the doc order the test in the first place? I hope you've asked your doc if there were any problems she or he was concerned about. Give the office a call to ask, is my suggestion. However, because you asked, I can interpret some of these comments because they are fairly standard ones. Please take them with a grain of salt, as info from a stranger over the internet should *always* be taken. *g* ----- Original Message ----- 1.)> Findings: There is satisfactory inspiratory effort with symmetrical > inflation of the lungs. Means you took a good, big breath when they said to do so, and therefore got a good look at the lungs, all of which filled with air fully on each side. This is a good thing. 2.)> The cardiomediastinal structures are in a > midline position. Means the heart, esophagus, big blood vessels, etc - all the stuff *between* the lungs, are in the middle where they should be. Nothing is abnormally pushing them toward one direction or another. Again, a good thing. 3.)> The heart size is normal. The cardiothoracic > ratio measures 16.5/33.5. Means the heart size is normal. No signs of cardiomegaly ( " big heart " ), which is something that often occurs with congestive heart failure or certain other types of heart disease. Again, a good thing. 4.)> The aortic arch is tortuous. There is > minimal prominence of the pulmonary vessels. There are no other > abnormalities. Says that your aorta - the biggest vessel off your heart - is a bit twisted, and some of the vessels that pass between the heart and lung are slightly big looking. Without being your doctor, there is no way anyone could know if this is a " normal variance " (as vessels can become tortuous as one ages for no apparent reason and cause no problem) or if you have some medical condition that the doc was concerned about and looking at your vessels for. Whatever the cause of these are for you (again, they can be due to nothing at all, or due to several other things), it seems to be very minor. So - ask your doc if this is a good thing or a bad thing. 5.) > Impression: No acute cardiopulmonary disease. The radiologist found no signs of " acute " (new, as opposed to chronic, or long-standing) diseases of your heart or lungs (of course, of those that can be detected by a chest x-ray). So - no signs of pneumonia or fluid in the lungs, no visible tumors or tuberculosis, no big heart or abnormal heart shape suggesting congestive heart failure, etc. This is a good thing. 6.) > Recommend clinical > correlation. If there is strong clinical suspicion, a repeat chest x- > ray should be obtained. See my answer to #4 above - the radiologist is saying the same thing. If your doc was getting a chest x-ray to look at your aorta and pulmonary vessels for some reason, then the only thing they found was that the aorta was a bit twisted and the pulmonary vessels were *minimally* " prominent. " A chest x-ray can only SEE this; it can't say whether this was a problem or not. Your doc ordered this as a tool to look to help evaluate your condition, and will INTERPRET the results in the context of knowing your medical history and current complaints, your physical exam, your labs, other test results, and everything else! As I mentioned, these can be " normal variants " - just the way your vessels are - or could be related to one of many kinds of conditions. Definitely, the cool thing is that nothing dramatic was found! Don't know if this helps or not (hope so!), but again - if you're worried, give your doc a call to ask. These reports can seem alarming and like there may be some big problem when in reality the radiologist was doing a standard disclaimer. I'm trying to think of an analogy. OK, here's one that may work: Let's say someone shows you a picture of a person with a slightly big nose, who you have never met and know nothing about. Now, you can see the slightly big nose, but there's no way for you to tell whether she just genetically has a slightly big nose, like all her family perhaps, or maybe she had just been punched in the nose and it was a little swollen. The statement to use " clinical correlation " is a very common comment from a radiologist who does not have enough information to know what a finding could mean, and is encouraging the ordering physician to make the final interpretation along with all the other info they have. OK, I do tend to run on. Hopefully I've made my point. If not, write me back and I'll try again. *g* - SC > Is there anything in this that I should be concerned about, even if > not related to my surgery on Friday? > > Any help is mighty appreciated. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2001 Report Share Posted August 20, 2001 That means that everything they can see is in the correct place and is of correct size. :-) > Hi All, > > I got the report for my latest chest x-ray, and wondered if all of > you wonderful medical people out there can help me translate it. > > Findings: There is satisfactory inspiratory effort with symmetrical > inflation of the lungs. The cardiomediastinal structures are in a > midline position. The heart size is normal. The cardiothoracic > ratio measures 16.5/33.5. The aortic arch is tortuous. There is > minimal prominence of the pulmonary vessels. There are no other > abnormalities. > > Impression: No acute cardiopulmonary disease. Recommend clinical > correlation. If there is strong clinical suspicion, a repeat chest x- > ray should be obtained. > > Is there anything in this that I should be concerned about, even if > not related to my surgery on Friday? > > Any help is mighty appreciated. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2001 Report Share Posted August 20, 2001 A tortuous aortic arch exists in 15-20% of patients. You have some interesting anatomy. But in the absence of clinical problems, I think ther is little to wrry about. Of course in real life I depend on radiologists to tell me what these things mean. in Seattle > Hi All, > > I got the report for my latest chest x-ray, and wondered if all of > you wonderful medical people out there can help me translate it. > > Findings: There is satisfactory inspiratory effort with symmetrical > inflation of the lungs. The cardiomediastinal structures are in a > midline position. The heart size is normal. The cardiothoracic > ratio measures 16.5/33.5. The aortic arch is tortuous. There is > minimal prominence of the pulmonary vessels. There are no other > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2001 Report Share Posted August 20, 2001 A tortuous aortic arch exists in 15-20% of patients. You have some interesting anatomy. But in the absence of clinical problems, I think ther is little to wrry about. Of course in real life I depend on radiologists to tell me what these things mean. in Seattle > Hi All, > > I got the report for my latest chest x-ray, and wondered if all of > you wonderful medical people out there can help me translate it. > > Findings: There is satisfactory inspiratory effort with symmetrical > inflation of the lungs. The cardiomediastinal structures are in a > midline position. The heart size is normal. The cardiothoracic > ratio measures 16.5/33.5. The aortic arch is tortuous. There is > minimal prominence of the pulmonary vessels. There are no other > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.