Ultra Sounds - Update page 2 > Women Shooters

Posted: 1/16/2005 12:50:26 PM EDT

I got a call Friday that they [my doctors] want me to come in for another ultra sound on one of my breasts. [no jokes please]. This would be the 4th Ultra Sound I have had done since September and I've had two mamograms. Evidently they keep thinking they see something and are not sure enough to justify a biopsy nor ignoring it. I was telling a friend of mine about it [via phone] and she said that I shouldn't be having so many ultrasounds that it isn't good for me. I've been researching on the web and can not find out any info on this but thought maybe one of you ladies might know more.

Patty

Posted: 1/16/2005 1:03:30 PM EDT

[#1]

I don't know what kind of risks are involved with having multiple ultra sounds, but there could be great risk involved with letting something go undetected. If your doctor doesn't find anything with this exam, I would consider getting a second opinion. I hope all turns out good for you.

Posted: 1/16/2005 1:06:57 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
I don't know what kind of risks are involved with having multiple ultra sounds, but there could be great risk involved with letting something go undetected. If your doctor doesn't find anything with this exam, I would consider getting a second opinion. I hope all turns out good for you.

I think this is what my friend was suggesting. She said it wasn't good to keep getting tests. My gut is telling me they're just being very careful. Which isn't a bad thing.

Patty

Posted: 1/16/2005 1:37:33 PM EDT

[#3]

I've never heard that getting a lot of ultrasounds is harmful. I think it is much better for you that they are being careful. Err on the side of caution, I always say. I hope everything turns out to be okay for you.

Posted: 1/16/2005 2:12:36 PM EDT

[#4]

I hope everything is okay with you. I don't think ultrasounds are risky,since I had so many of them when I was pregnant with my son.

Posted: 1/16/2005 2:54:04 PM EDT

[#5]

Patty,

No jokes here! My thoughts and prayers are with you for a determination that it's nothing more serious than a fibroid cyst (I think that is what they are called).

Ultrasound is essentially "sonar" as used by ships. Pretty neat technology and it does NOT use any radiation, thus it is not harmful.

MRIs can sometimes get more detailed info than the mammogram. Within the last 6 months we attended a couple of seminars on "what's new in early detection", and they mentioned a newer technology for detection, but right now neither my Wife or I can recall what that newer technology was called.

Watch for an IM.

Posted: 1/16/2005 4:53:18 PM EDT

[#6]

Damn hun! I would straight up ask them, "Why are you doing so many?" Press them for an answer. They need to keep you informed, even if they just think they see something. Prayers sent and let us know what’s going on.

PS: You want me to come up there and talk to them?

Posted: 1/16/2005 5:30:36 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Damn hun! I would straight up ask them, "Why are you doing so many?" Press them for an answer. They need to keep you informed, even if they just think they see something. Prayers sent and let us know what’s going on.

PS: You want me to come up there and talk to them?smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/s/evil.gif

That would fix their wagon wouldn't it?! I'll have this one just to be safe but I've decided I have to find a more competant team. Someone who will keep me in the loop of what's going on.

Thank you for your prayers and encouragement. Patty

Posted: 1/16/2005 6:42:02 PM EDT

[#8]

Having been an engineer at Siemens Ultrasound (in Issaquah, WA), I can say that I never heard of any ill efffects as a result of numerous scans. Employees there would get scanned routinely in the process of testing the equipment (all voluntary of course). I would say that your regular cell phone use poses more of a threat to your health than hundreds of ultrasound scans.

Posted: 1/16/2005 7:07:01 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Having been an engineer at Siemens Ultrasound (in Issaquah, WA), I can say that I never heard of any ill efffects as a result of numerous scans. Employees there would get scanned routinely in the process of testing the equipment (all voluntary of course). I would say that your regular cell phone use poses more of a threat to your health than hundreds of ultrasound scans.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Patty

Posted: 1/16/2005 7:08:15 PM EDT

[#10]

Radilogists know how high is too high, how strong is too strong.
They even have used it in physical therapy for high pain patients every week. It helps the pain.
Women have them every month of pregnancy in the second and third trimesters with no ill effects.
they aren't going to put you in danger with this machine.
There are no documented risks. No ionizing radiation exposure is involved.
Please dont' worry. And let us know how your test turns out.
We are routing for you!~
Joyce

Posted: 1/17/2005 12:44:19 AM EDT

[#11]

Malpractice? You don't think there's any people out there that would sue a doctor because he/she missed something that later turned out to be serious do you?

For one reason or another the doctor isn't feeling good enough about what they have found to say, without a doubt, that everything is normal so to convince themselves they run every test, sometimes more than once, before they will offer a go/no-go.

I'm seeing the doctors caution in this as a good thing and I'm a guy, so it takes an act of congress to get me to see a doctor if I'm not bleeding or in pain.

Posted: 1/17/2005 7:24:08 AM EDT

[#12]

The early days of ultrasound ('77-'84) saw higher power levels and no standard among the few manufacturers at the time. The FDA then (not sure exactly when) published some recommended max power levels to limit the energy focused on a specific area. Now all mfr's follow the guidelines and energy levels are fairly low, though we do know that cells are somewhat "excited" by ultrasound.

Newer systems have high bandwidth receiver arrays which offer better resolution, or image quality, and power can be decreased even more. There is still a fundamental law though, the deeper the penetration you want you must either use lower frequency or increase power. In your case, breast ultrasounds typically involve shallow to medium depths from 0.5cm to 5cm and are usually done with the higher frequency transducers, which offer the best resolution to differentiate the subtle tissues in those types of organs.

As an adult, you should have little to no concern over ultrasound energy. The frequencies are in the 2-20 mhz range and are not microwaves. Up to this point there's been over 25 years of medical history and no ill affects, though there have been cases of malfunctions where a scanner will apply too much power to the transducer and the surface of it would get hot enough to create a minor skin burn.

There has been nearly as much history with OB use. I don't know of any problems scanning fetuses but if I were female and pregnant I would certainly limit the amount of exposure to anything unnatural. Just my 2 cents.

Posted: 1/17/2005 7:30:25 AM EDT

[#13]

All of my children, 18, 16, & 10 got ultra-sounded when they were envitro and I've got a pic to prove it, and they're just plain old ordinary rambunkous kids today.

pattymcn: Your doc may see something that is suspicious and probably wants to keep an eye on it.

Posted: 1/17/2005 7:32:21 AM EDT

[#14]

^ Thank you, very informative. I appreciate it and all the well wishes too. Patty

Posted: 1/17/2005 7:50:45 AM EDT

[#15]

Please note that these are more of an issue with a developing fetus than they are with an adult. All that rapid cell division and whatnot.

Most of the articles are prenatal.

Risks associated w/ ultrasound:

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=424580

Diagnostic ultrasound: effects on the DNA and growth patterns of animal cells.

Liebeskind D, Bases R, Elequin F, Neubort S, Leifer R, Goldberg R, Koenigsberg M.

The effects of diagnostic levels of ultrasound on DNA of HeLa cells included: increased immunoreactivity to antinucleoside antibodies in G1 cells, strongly suggestive of unwinding of the helix or single-strand break induction, and low levels of non-semiconservative synthesis in logarithmically growing cells treated with hydroxyurea, indicating repair synthesis. In the C3H mouse cell line 10T-1/2, Cl 8, loss of contact inhibition with a criss-crossed growth pattern was seen. In one experiment, tumors developed in syngeneic mice at the site of injection of ultrasonically treated cells. Ultrasound in the diagnostic range appears to cause detectable effects on DNA and growth patterns of animal cells.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3308504

Diagnostic levels of ultrasound may disrupt myelination.

Ellisman MH, Palmer DE, Andre MP.

Department of Neurosciences, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla 92093
Neonatal rats 3 to 5 days of age were exposed to the ultrasound beam from a medical ultrasound imaging system. Dorsal nerve roots were examined by electron microscopy. Comparison between exposed and sham-exposed controls revealed disruption of the nodes of Ranvier attributable to ultrasound. Morphologic changes ranged from vacuole formation in the paranodal region to frank demyelination and were still evident after 24 h of recovery. Rats of this age are at a stage of myelination similar to that of a human fetus 4 to 5 months. The ultrasound intensities used in this study are consistent with those used for human imaging (SPTA 0.135 mW/cm2, SATA 0.045 mW/cm2, SPTP 8.7 W/cm2, SPPA 1.9 W/cm2), but the relevance of these findings to clinical ultrasound will require further study.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=7115633

Premature ovulation after ovarian ultrasonography.

Testart J, Thebault A, Souderes E, Frydman R.

Whereas follicle rupture never occurred before the 37th hour after an ovulatory stimulus (either the onset of the LH surge or hCG administration) in control patients, ovulation was observed at 26 to 36 h in women submitted to ultrasonography during the late follicular phase. Premature ovulation was observed in 5 out of 23 and 8 out of 19 cycles when ultrasonography occurred during the 3 days preceding or in the 36 h following ovulatory stimulus. This as yet unexplained observation leads us to reconsider the advisability of ovarian scan during the late follicular phase of the menstrual cycle.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2193518

Randomized prospective trial comparing ultrasonography and pelvic examination for preterm labor surveillance.

Lorenz RP, Comstock CH, Bottoms SF, Marx SR.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48072.

This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of cervical assessment by either ultrasonography or bimanual pelvic examination in a program for preterm labor surveillance. Patients (n = 57) at risk for preterm birth were seen once a week for patient education, review of symptoms, and cervical evaluation. Cervical evaluation was assigned randomly to either ultrasonographic evaluation or pelvic examination. The groups did not differ in demographic or obstetric factors. The overall rate of prematurity was 18%. Preterm labor was more frequent with ultrasonographic evaluation (52%) than with pelvic examination (25%) (p less than 0.05). The group evaluated by ultrasonography received oral tocolytic agents (55%) more than the group that had pelvic examinations (21%) (p less than 0.02). The groups did not differ in infant birth weights, length of gestation, or neonatal mortality or morbidity. In this prospective randomized study of patients at risk for preterm birth, patients under surveillance by ultrasonographic assessment of the cervix did not fare better than those assigned to bimanual examination.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8105165

Effects of frequent ultrasound during pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial.

Newnham JP, Evans SF, Michael CA, Stanley FJ, Landau LI.

University Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, King Edward Memorial Hospital, Sublaco, Perth, Western Australia.

Despite widespread application of ultrasound imaging and Doppler blood flow studies, the effects of their frequent and repeated use in pregnancy have not been evaluated in controlled trials. From 2834 women with single pregnancies at 16-20 weeks gestation, 1415 were selected at random to receive ultrasound imaging and continuous-wave Doppler flow studies at 18, 24, 28, 34, and 38 weeks gestation (the intensive group) and 1419 to receive single ultrasound imaging at 18 weeks (the regular group). Outcome data was obtained from 99% of women who entered the study. The only difference between the two groups was significantly higher intrauterine growth restriction in the intensive group, when expressed both as birthweight < 10th centile (relative risk 1.35; 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.67; p = 0.006) and birthweight < 3rd centile (relative risk 1.65; 95% confidence intervals 1.09 to 2.49; p = 0.020). While it is possible that this finding was a chance effect, it is also plausible that frequent exposure to ultrasound may have influenced fetal growth. Repeated prenatal ultrasound imaging and Doppler flow examinations should be restricted to those women to whom the information is likely to be of clinical benefit.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=6198611

Case-control study of prenatal ultrasonography exposure in children with delayed speech.

Campbell JD, Elford RW, Brant RF.

Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Alta.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is an association between prenatal ultrasound exposure and delayed speech in children. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Network of community physicians affiliated with the Primary Care Research Unit, University of Calgary. SUBJECTS: Thirty-four practitioners identified 72 children aged 24 to 100 months who had undergone a formal speech-language evaluation and were found to have delayed speech of unknown cause by a speech-language pathologist. For each case subject the practitioners found two control subjects matched for sex, date of birth, sibling birth order and associated health problems. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of prenatal ultrasound exposure and delayed speech. RESULTS: The children with delayed speech had a higher rate of ultrasound exposure than the control subjects. The findings suggest that a child with delayed speech is about twice as likely as a child without delayed speech to have been exposed to prenatal ultrasound waves (odds ratio 2.8, 95% confidence limit 1.5 to 5.3; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: An association between prenatal ultrasonography exposure and delayed speech was found. If there is no obvious clinical indication for diagnostic in-utero ultrasonography, physicians might be wise to caution their patients about the vulnerability of the fetus to noxious agents.

There's a few more but I got tired of copy and pasting.

Sorry. Just wanted to point out that they do cause some changes at a cellular level and give ya a bit more information to judge the risks vs benefits for yourself.

Did they mention the fact that your breasts change throughout your cycle? Some women get a bit lumpy durring their period and just before. Have your tests been around the time of your cycle? Would this test be around your cycle? Maybe give it a week if it is. (Sometimes Dr.s hear hoofbeat and think zebra instead of horses.

) Just mention because I've BTDT.

Hope it goes well and turns out to be nothing.

Posted: 1/17/2005 8:07:53 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted: Sorry. Just wanted to point out that they do cause some changes at a cellular level and give ya a bit more information to judge the risks vs benefits for yourself.

Did they mention the fact that your breasts change throughout your cycle? Some women get a bit lumpy durring their period and just before. Have your tests been around the time of your cycle? Would this test be around your cycle? Maybe give it a week if it is. (Sometimes Dr.s hear hoofbeat and think zebra instead of horses. ) Just mention because I've BTDT.

Hope it goes well and turns out to be nothing.

Thank you Persephone, I haven't gotten any information about anything except they have their eye on my left one [insert grin]. I do not recall where I was at in my cycle in comparison to my previous tests but I'll make note of it this time. Since sending the husband to the vet - I haven't paid that close attention!

I appreciate your information and well wishes too! Patty

Posted: 1/17/2005 11:17:58 PM EDT

[#17]

For the record, I was aware of the studies in Persephone's post when I made mine. Those are quite weak studies that conclude very little that can be substantiated. They fall into the same category as "global warming."

Posted: 1/17/2005 11:25:27 PM EDT

[#18]

To put it in perspective, people using this product bladder scanner use it several times a day....every day. Despite these being around for years, no data suggests they stop making or have patients stop using them.

Posted: 1/18/2005 1:53:13 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
For the record, I was aware of the studies in Persephone's post when I made mine. Those are quite weak studies that conclude very little that can be substantiated. They fall into the same category as "global warming."

I said it was more of an issue with prenatal. And if it's in the same category as "global warming" then why this:

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that in low-risk pregnancies ultrasound generally be reserved for answering specific medical questions, rather than offered routinely to all women.

www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/681_1167.asp

Just wanted to mention that even the experts can't agree when it comes to pre-nates since pre-nates was brought up earlier in the thread.

Posted: 1/18/2005 4:19:22 PM EDT

[#20]

I think excessive use during my pregnancy caused my daughter to have developed super human hearing...that child can hear a pin drop from across the room and tell you exactly where it landed.

But seriously, please keep us updated. Will send some prayers your way as well. There have also been studies that having a positive attitude can actually improves one's health! Stay positive my friend!!!

Posted: 1/18/2005 6:49:22 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted: Stay positive my friend!!!

Thank you SigZiggy! I appreciate that and am trying. I had my biopsy today and the results weren't terribly good so I have an appointment to see a specialist at the end of the week. I guess it's best to deal with this ASAP.

Patty

Posted: 1/18/2005 7:15:18 PM EDT

[#22]

Patty,

I'm awfully sorry to hear that!

Keep your chin up and know that support and help is only a mouse-click or phone call away from a lot of your friends here.

Posted: 1/18/2005 7:21:23 PM EDT

[#23]

Thank you!

Posted: 1/18/2005 8:25:22 PM EDT

[#24]

Please keep us posted, Patty - and we will send prayers your way.

I had an excisional biopsy a couple of years ago. It came out fine, but the word "biopsy" is enough to scare anyone.

Posted: 1/18/2005 9:05:57 PM EDT

[#25]

Thank you, I really appreciate it. Its no fun but it's better knowing theres people behind you. Patty

Posted: 1/18/2005 11:04:32 PM EDT

[#26]

We got your back!

Posted: 1/18/2005 11:12:58 PM EDT

[#27]

+1

Posted: 1/18/2005 11:17:17 PM EDT

[#28]

Hang tough Patty. This too shall pass.

Posted: 1/18/2005 11:28:45 PM EDT

[#29]

Hang in there Patty!

I have had 20+ ultrasounds, and have always been reassured that there is no cause to worry from the ultrasound.

You must be so stressed out!

The only thing that I can add, and I hope this comes out right, is that if there is anything there (god forbid) it is so small, or so early, that it is hard to be definitive. I would feel comforted that your doctor is being so thorough.

God bless, and keep us posted.

Posted: 1/22/2005 7:33:52 AM EDT

[#30]

I meet my new doctors yesterday and had another ultrasound and have an appointment for a digital mapping. So far no "C word" dx so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. They have sent me to an oncologist and they are concerned but haven't said the "C" word yet.

Patty

Posted: 1/22/2005 7:41:41 AM EDT

[#31]

thx for the update. I'll continue praying.

Posted: 1/22/2005 8:57:16 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
I meet my new doctors yesterday and had another ultrasound and have an appointment for a digital mapping. So far no "C word" dx so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. They have sent me to an oncologist and they are concerned but haven't said the "C" word yet.

Patty

I wish you well.

Posted: 1/22/2005 3:57:33 PM EDT

[#33]

Got my fingers, toes, legs, hair, and eyes crossed for ya!!!!

Posted: 1/22/2005 4:35:49 PM EDT

[#34]

Ya got a lot of us praying for you and wishing you the best.....

Posted: 1/24/2005 10:18:13 PM EDT

[#35]

Fervernt prayers sent, pattymcn.

Warning

Confirm Action

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Ultra Sounds - Update page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Ultra Sounds - Update page 2