Posted: 7/21/2015 12:03:32 PM EDT
|
Gross hematuria on occasion since I was 22 years old, seems to be related to sex.
Had a had bout with accompanying prostatitis two years ago, had a regular CT, clear. Eventually cleared up with antibiotics. Had a bout almost a year ago. Urologist did Cystoscopy a couple months ago, it was clear and found nothing. Had a bout again three weeks ago. Urologist prescribes CT Urogram and a follow up Cystoscopy. I'm 43 and have not had kids of my own yet. Not sure if I ever will. Doubtful but you never know. I researched CT Urogram. It appears it isn't recommended for people under 40 due to the rad risk. According to the studies I have found online, it looks like the average dose administered under controlled conditions is 9-18 mSv due to having to due three scans. But the dose they found being administered in the field was between 15 and 90 mSv......equivalent to 400 chest X-rays and more than some of the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The additional risk of cancer is reportedly 1 in 2000 according to one study. Of course the longer you live, the more time for damaged DNA to make itself known via mutation. I'm a young guy! I called the urologist and asked for him to call me back to discuss and see if there might be alternatives, i.e. sonography or MRI. I was passed off to his nurse who basically tried to just tell me it's no different than any other CT procedure. I told her I would like to discuss it with the doc. Finally, this AM she calls me back and says that the doc says it's no different than any other CT procedure and he needs it done before doing the cystoscopy so he knows what he is looking for. I think this is a lot of rad exposure, and I think my urologist is a dick for not being willing to discuss this with me or discuss alternatives. I do understand that there is a trade off involved between finding an problem, and the risks of being able to find the problem. Any suggestions docs? ETA link: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/746630_3 |
|
Quoted:
You would have to have that procedure done everyday for the next 10 years to experience any radiation effects, but hey I'm not a doctor. There are two types of side effects from rad exposure - the immediate effects (from serious overexposure) and long term (from smaller doses that do not produce immediate side effects but do cellular damage). |
|
Quoted: There are two types of side effects from rad exposure - the immediate effects (from serious overexposure) and long term (from smaller doses that do not produce immediate side effects but do cellular damage). Quoted: Quoted: You would have to have that procedure done everyday for the next 10 years to experience any radiation effects, but hey I'm not a doctor. There are two types of side effects from rad exposure - the immediate effects (from serious overexposure) and long term (from smaller doses that do not produce immediate side effects but do cellular damage). |
|
Quoted:
You probably get more radiation flying in a plane than doing that procedure. And if you want to discuss treatments with the doc, then make an apptand go in to see him. They don't have time for lengthy phone convos after your Dr Google consult. You are so wrong I can forgive the veiled insult. Both the National Council on Radiation Protection and The International Commission on Radiological Protection recommends a member of the general public be exposed to a limit of 1 mSv/yr. For those occupationally exposed, the commission recommends somewhat higher limits. They did a study that show the average dose in one year for flight crews at Xinjian Airlines was 2.19 mSv/yr. https://www.hps.org/publicinformation/ate/faqs/commercialflights.html As I cited in the other study, some CT urograms are giving a rad dose of 90 mSv!!!! That is the equivalent rad dose of almost 40 years in the air focused on your abdomen, |
|
So 100 mSv is the minimum dose clearly shown to increase cancer risk. And this procedure can dole out up to 90 mSv. Nice. |
|
Quoted:
You probably get more radiation flying in a plane than doing that procedure. And if you want to discuss treatments with the doc, then make an apptand go in to see him. They don't have time for lengthy phone convos after your Dr Google consult. I tried to discuss with him, he basically said "it's a trade off and the risks are low, gotta go". |