PET Scan vs CT/Bone Scans

Arayasunshine69

Hi!  I just moved from Edmonton, AB to Vancouver Island BC.  I have had CT and Bone Scans in the past, but never a PET scan, but my new oncologist is sending me for one, which I will need to go to Vancouver for.  What is the difference?  And if it can be more thorough, then why didn't my oncolgist in Edmonton send me for one?  Thanks!

AgentMo

PET is much more sensitive than CT and Bone Scans. Bone Scans are known for producing unreliable results, but they are cheap. PET is better than CT because you look for increased activity in your tissue. With regard to you onc in Edmonton: guess money is what is comes down to.

pickle

Hi Kellie

I am in Edmonton. I had a bone & CT and tehn had a Pet last summer. I still don't understand the differences and why oncs have differing ideas. It sure can be frustrating. Who was your onc at the Cross?

bak94

Pickle, I am in the US and when I was diagnosed 8 years ago with stage 2 I also only received a bone scan and xray, not even a ct scan. This time I am stage 3 and have had bone scan, ct and pet. SOme docs base it on stage to as what scans they do and some prefer to do all the scans, it does vary in the US from doc to doc, plus the insurance issues come into play.

clariceak

I also had a pet scan, but feel that was due to being the cusp of Stage IV with a positive internal mammary node, vascular invasion and a big tumor.  I don't think it's automatic for Stage III, and although Pet scans are more sensitive, they are harder on the liver and are not done routinely.  Hope you enjoy Vancouver!  I always loved going there when I lived in Seattle.

AnacortesGirl

PET scan show if there are any areas of increased glucose activity.  That is an indication of high cell activity; cancer cells are continuously multiplying so an area of "high uptake" can indicate an area with cancer.  They are very sensitive scans so these areas can be very small and either missed or not detected on a CT or bone scan where there has to be enough cells so the mass is visible to the eye.  But the downside of a PET is that they are notorious for false positives.  An area of uptake doesn't mean that it's cancer.  That needs to be ruled out by additional scans and/or biopsy.

It sounds like your new onc is looking at your stage and feels more comfortable with a full battery of scans.  It could also be that Vancouver has a more advanced PET imager than what was available in Edmonton so it makes more sense since you are closer.

But I'm sorry you have to make the long trip to Vancouver!  Where are you on the island? Are they sending you to the complex off of 12th?

bevin

HI there, I had a combined CT/Pet - which is the preferred exam. It provides the structural view and maps that up with the PET which looks for uptake of glucose and radioactive dye that active cells in your body pick up. If possible, I'd ask for the combined Pet/CT and see if they can do that for you.

Good luck with your tests.

Bevin

Anonymous

The downside of PET scan in my case was that it didn't show any "uptake" in any areas, not even having a 6 cm tumor and positive nodes.  Another downside is it puts extra radiation in the body, whereas the MRI does not.  I haven't had any luck with the MRI either -- I had one prior to mast surgery and it did not show the accurate size of tumor --    Bottom line, we need better imaging and diagnostic tests -- NOW