Re: some results from ct scan

[Guest guest]

Hi

On my last ct scan that I had there is a new development of right-sided

hydronephrosis with the ureter dilated to the level of the pelvic brim. No

definite cause for the ureteric dilatation was seen. Can anyone tell me what

they know about this? Thanks

Janette

_________________________________________________________________

Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online

http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

[Guest guest]

Janette,

You are obstructed. There is no other explanation. It could be tumor

mets, it could be inflamation from the the body fighting cancer in that

area, or (less likely) you could be passing a stone. You need to see a

urologist and see if a stent could be inserted. Till then you might try

antiinflammatories to try to achieve drainage. If your cervical cancer is

SCC then I would start on benzaldehyde -- maybe 300-400mg/d enteric coated

in cyclodextrin.

Re: [ ] some results from ct scan

> Hi

>

> On my last ct scan that I had there is a new development of right-sided

> hydronephrosis with the ureter dilated to the level of the pelvic brim. No

> definite cause for the ureteric dilatation was seen. Can anyone tell me

what

> they know about this? Thanks

>

> Janette

>

[Guest guest]

Hi

I presume when you said " mets " that you mean metastatic or metastases? Also

what is " SCC " ?

Also Gubi wrote:

" I don't know if you were diagnosed with cervical cancer or not. At any

rate, Hydronephrosis could be due to other reasons and usually the prognosis

is fairly good. Just felt that I should not have jumped the gun, and should

not have been so alarming. I suggest you discuss the CT results with your

doctors. "

Well I will tell you very shortly what I have got. In September 2001 I was

diagnosed with cervical cancer stage IIIB. I had the chemo and radiation.

After treatment my smear tests came back normal and from four months of

treatment I went back to work in April 2002 starting part-time building

myself up to full time. The reason for this is that I had almost 6 months

off from work. After 2 months back at work I started having pelvic pain

building up to very severe 24 hour pain which the doctors ignored for 3

months. I then went for a CT scan in September which showed that I had a

recurrent of my cancer but in the lymph nodes. I finished work in October.

The drs wanted to help me with my pain first before starting with any chemo.

About 2 weeks after I finished work I did not need any medication for pain

relief and have been pain free since then. Occasionally I get a bit of

pelvic pain but that is when I am under a great deal of stress and it is

only for a very short time and it goes away.

When I went for my ct scan results a few weeks ago, they did not actually

have the written results only the scans. The drs looked at the scans but

upon reviewing them that there was no difference between this one and the

one done in September. They have not contacted me since so I presume that it

is not necessary that medication or otherwise is necessary.

I will type out what the paragraph says that was written to my solicitor. My

solicitor has had to have an updated health report re my legal case.

" Her CT scan from the 10th December 2002 demonstrated enlarging para aortic

lymph nodes and the new development of right-sided hydronephrosis with the

ureter dilated to the level of the pelvic brim. No definite cause for the

ureteric dilatation was seen. Appearances within the pelvis have not changed

significantly. There continues to be some stranding and thickening of the

soft tissues along the left lateral sidewall of the site of the known

recurrence. There was also a trace of fluid present within the pelvis. There

were no signs of liver disease nor lung metastases at the lung bases. "

If I do too much or do a lot of walking, my pelvic area seems to swell up.

It goes down overnight, obviously with rest.

My next appointment at the hospital is not until February 2003 but have an

appointment with my GP next week. I will talk to him and see if he knows of

what this is about, but if you can help me further apart from what

have said, I will look forward to any comments. I have done a lot of

research so do not be afraid to come straight out with advice.

- I will take your email and any others that I get to my GP next

week, thanks.

Janette

(sorry for such a long email)

>From: " VGammill " <ygammil1@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: Re: [ ] some results from ct scan

>Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 21:26:55 -0800

>

>Janette,

> You are obstructed. There is no other explanation. It could be tumor

>mets, it could be inflamation from the the body fighting cancer in that

>area, or (less likely) you could be passing a stone. You need to see a

>urologist and see if a stent could be inserted. Till then you might try

>antiinflammatories to try to achieve drainage. If your cervical cancer is

>SCC then I would start on benzaldehyde -- maybe 300-400mg/d enteric coated

>in cyclodextrin.

>

>

>

> Re: [ ] some results from ct scan

>

>

> > Hi

> >

> > On my last ct scan that I had there is a new development of right-sided

> > hydronephrosis with the ureter dilated to the level of the pelvic brim.

>No

> > definite cause for the ureteric dilatation was seen. Can anyone tell me

>what

> > they know about this? Thanks

> >

> > Janette

> >

>

>

_________________________________________________________________

Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 3 months FREE*.

http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail & xAPID=42 & PS=47575 & PI=7324 & DI=74\

74 & SU=

http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg & HL=1216hotmailtaglines_addphotos_3mf

[Guest guest]

Mets are metastases. SCC is squamous cell carcinoma.

VG

Re: [ ] some results from ct scan

> >

> >

> > > Hi

> > >

> > > On my last ct scan that I had there is a new development of

right-sided

> > > hydronephrosis with the ureter dilated to the level of the pelvic

brim.

> >No

> > > definite cause for the ureteric dilatation was seen. Can anyone tell

me

> >what

> > > they know about this? Thanks

> > >

> > > Janette