CA125 and CT Scan.

[juneann]

Ok, typed up a long post only to lose it so I shall try and remember much of what I typed...Aged 55 with regular horrendously heavy periods for last six and recently wrote about CA125 jumped up to 765 which my Gynae doesn't really deal with apparently, but finds it high for Fibroids which is what I have and a cyst - recent Hysteroscopy results benign so was discharged. I also have RA but my Rheumy doesn't deal with CA125 either. My GP suggested a third ultrasound (seriously?) so my Gynae has taken it onboard and called me when I insisted that it may be better to go delving now than something much worse present itself later. We finally came down on the side of a CT scan with the radiation risks explained, three years worth of background radiation and a risk to 1 in 2000 developing something nasty from it. The scan is on Friday but I am once again having second thoughts...ignore the increasing CA125 (surely not a sensible option) or have the CT Scan with risks whilst bearing in mind at 55 I have in my lifetime had three or four chest x-rays, two or three hand and feet x-rays, two MRI scans on my back and maybe four ultrasounds to the abdomen and internal.

[helixhelix]

MRI and ultrasounds don't use radiation, so those don't count. And yes CT scans do expose you to extra radiation that is approx 3 years' natural exposure. X-rays are much, much less - the amount you've had is about 6 months worth of natural background radiation. (Mammograms are about an extra month each).

I've had to have a number of CT scans on the chest, to look at potential lung problems. The way I looked at it was that if a real problem was identified earlier as a result that scan, then that was a benefit worth taking the risk for. I'm a bit older than you, so less time left to develop a radiation induced problem. Maybe if I had been 20 I'd have been more concerned.