BELIEVE! Believe in miracles!!! They do happen - each and every day...and this news is a miracle to me! As small as it is...this is such joyous news! Thank YOU God and to all of YOU!
Before I add the scan results...the CEA (tumor markers) number have been:
5/4 - 367.9 6/29 - 279.5 8/25 - 143.9 9/8 - 128.7 10/8 - 86.1 12/12 - 61.5
normal range is 0.0 - 4.7
==============================
CT chest with contrast
Clinical history: History of colorectal carcinoma.
Technique: The study was preformed from the apices to the dome of the diaphragm using intravenous contrast. Patient was given 100 cc of Ultravist.
Comparison study: October 15, 2010
Findings: Normal enhancement of the thyroid glands is noted. Port-A-Cath is seen in good position. Basilar structures are within normal limits. Cardiac silhouette is not enlarged. No medastinal, hilar or axillary adenopathy is identified. Lungs demonstrate no infiltrates, effusions or nodular densities are seen. Bony structures demonstrate minimal degenerative change. Soft tissues appear unremarkable.
Impression:
1. Port-A-Cath in good position.
2. No evidence for metastatic disease.
CT abdomen with contrast
Clinical history: History of colorectal carcinoma.
Comparison study: October 15, 2010
Technique: The study was preformed from the dome of the diaphragm to iliac crests using oral and intravenous contrast. Patient was given 100 cc of Ultravist.
Findings: Posterior segment of the right lobe of the liver in the region of the dome demonstrates evidence of dense enhancing area measuring 5 x 8 mm. This was seen on the previous study and appears decreased in size. A second lesion is noted in the most inferior aspect of the right lobe of the liver. This shows evidence of some calcifications and some irregular enhancement. The low attenuation portion of this measures 8 x 4 mm. The second component of this lesion which is located inferiorly shows some irregular enhancement and measure 12 x 14 mm. Spleen demonstrates normal enhancement. Pancreas and adrenal glands are within normal limits. No abnormal enhancement is seen. No intrahepatic or extrahepatic biliary dilation is seen. Patient is status post cholecystectomy. Kidneys demonstrate benign bilateral renal cysts. No enhancing lesions ae seen. No intrarenal calculi are noted. No hydronephrosis is seen. Mild vascular calcifactions are noted. No abdominal adenopathy is seen. The visualized bowel appears unremarkable. No hernias are seen. No ascities is identified. Bony structures demonstrate mild degenerative change without evidence for metastatic bone disease.
Impression:
1. Interval decrease in size of metastatic disease to the liver.
2. Benign renal cysts.
3. Mild vascular calcifications.
CT pelvis with contrast
Clinical history: History of colorectal carcinoma.
Technique: The study was done from the iliac crests to the symphysis pubis using oral and intravenous contrast. Patient was given 100 cc of Ultravist.
Findings: The uterus and bladder appear unremarkable. Visualized bowel is within normal limits. No pelvic adenopathy is identified. No hernias are noted. Bony structures appear unremarkable.
Impression: Normal study.
=========================
ADDENDUM: CT OF THE ABDOMEN 12/10/2010
Findings: Regarding the right posterior segment hepatic lesion with enhancement this has shown decrease in size. Measures 8 x 8 mm, previously measuring 12 x 12 mm. It appears visually smaller.
Regarding the lesion in the right lobe posterior segment inferiorly seen near the tip of the liver, this likewise has shown improvement. The nonenhancing component currently measuring 8 x 4 mm, previously measuring 7 x 5. There is again a calcification associated with it. Inferiorly the more enhancing component today measures 12 x 14 mm and appears visually improved. It previously measured 18 x 17 mm.
Regarding the non-target lesions: In the left anterior hepatic lobe the previously described 4 x 4 mm lesion is no long visualized. The right lobe posterior segment lesion measuring 4 x 4 mm. is no long visualized.
==========
This addendum was added due to the fact that the scan results were read by another doctor and didn't note the sizes of the lesions.
