I was unaware until my last doctor visit that the contrast dye, gadolinium, is retained in the body. My PCP sent me to a new Oncologist that is well versed on this subject as it applies to cancer patients. The question is if yearly full-body scans with gadolinium may potentially do more harm than good. It is one of those things that can only be fully evaluated after the fact. If they find cancer that other tests missed, then it is good, however, if it comes out cancer-free, then one might wish they hadn't had it if they suspect gadolinium deposits in their body may cause them nerve issues years down the road. This concerns me because of numerous MRIs with contrast I have had in the last 30 years. At least four out of twenty were using gadolinium. I don't know about the other agents used or if any harmful effects have ever been noted. So with new concerns, my PCP won't order an MRI with contrast and leaves that up to a specialist and if they order such a scan, then the attending radiologist has to approve or reject the use of contrast. If the radiologist rejects it, then it is off. I will find out more in my December oncologist visit, but as it stands now, I doubt I will ever have one again unless an Oncologist suspects cancer and has some kind of proof for their suspicions. While the mental aspect of me hearing that the yearly (for 5 years) scan shows me cancer-free is great stress relief, the worry of possible early dementia has negated such revelation. Should the doc suspect cancer, then I will insist on the scan, but otherwise, keep pushing for surgery that would remove tissue where genetics is 97% sure cancer will show up before I hit 80. So far tests show no sign so I doubt that I will ever get the surgery (unless cancer is found) that was recommended and scheduled before The Commie China Killer Virus upset the applecart. .
As eye opening Faye's comment and worries are - I on the other hand figure at this stage of my life - so what. That is just my personal feelings. If I were younger I might would be more hesitant over many things. Plus for me with all that is going on in this world, matters of what might kill me in the future is way down my list. There are people whose systems are super sensitive and what might not bother one, could very well cause another many problems. @Faye Fox I am sympatric to your concerns Faye, but try not to worry much about the possibilities .
So are you saying your doctor is concerned enough to think the risks outweigh the benefits, Faye? Now I'm worried again. I knew the highest risk was for those with impaired kidney function, coupled with the problem that the most effective version for viewing kidneys is also the one with that presents the highest risk. I recently told one doctor (a urologist) of my concern over gadolinium and got an earful of "with all the people who have had it, they would be dying right & left..." The guy was a jerk. I didn't go back for a second appointment. I have had one or two MRIs with it in the past 3 years and always drank tons of water afterwards (I put a bunch of bottles of it in my truck for right after the procedure) to flush it out of my system as best I could. I did the same thing after the barium contrast I drank for a CT scan. I have no idea if it really did any good or if was what they tell you to do for the illusion of control and so they can later blame the damage on patient non-compliance.
I know some contrast media are very hard on the kidneys, but, as far as I know, the really bad ones are no longer used. They still have limits on kidney function in order to use even the newer ones.
Not really. The biggest problem I have with the full-body cancer scan is the saline flush in preparation. It is difficult to keep from going into vertigo. This is my main concern, but the doctor has to point out that they don't like to give these scans unless other tests indicate a possibility of cancer because of the gadolinium being retained in the body. My new oncologist had all the blood work done and chest Xrays, so depending on the outcome of them, will determine if he will order a full body scan. The risk of a full scan with gadolinium at my age, he doesn't see a problem except Medicare and secondary require him showing the necessity. While the risk may be low and of little concern at my age, there has to be a benefit other than just for my peace of mind. Genetic testing hasn't yet been enough reason to order these scans. My oncologist believes the benefit of a yearly scan outweighs any risk in established cancer patients, especially those that went through chemo. Since my original scan showed my cancer localized and it was removed and my yearly blood markers show correct, getting a scan would be of no benefit regardless of what genetic testing shows is the consensus. I think insurance played a heavy hand in studies showing the risk of such scans since they are very expensive. Next week I will know what is in store for me. I will say no to any more painful biopsies.