MRI vs Pet Scan. Which is preferred when checking for mets?

Can't tell why your Dr ordered what he/she did - only way to know is to ask him/her why it was preferred.

When I was DXd, I had a Bone Scan first, then a CT and an MRI (both with contrast). Then a PET which 'lit up' on an area along my lower jaw.(Was immediately biopsied - 'nothing' there.). All of my Scans were full body. PET Scans are very sensitive and will 'light up' on any possible inflammation - cancerous or not.

Our Drs are each unique with different experiences with TXing different types of BC. Thus, not all will always order exactly the same for each of us individually. We are each unique (as is our DX) with no 2 of us being exactly the same as anyone else - similar yes, but not exactly the same. My TX plan definitely did not follow the protocohol that almost everyone follows for IBC - it worked great for me though (and the way Dr T explained it to me, it made a LOT of sense).

If you are concerned/questioning - ask your Dr to explain his/her decision. If you don't understand 'something' - keep asking the same question until the Dr puts it in words YOU understand.

Hi Dee!

I've had 3 MRIs and 3 PET scans, and the latter (in my case) produced a false positive (left hip). So, maybe your MO is trying to avoid false positives.

Another issue is insurance -- the PET scan is an expensive test, and my insurance requires pre-authorization for it. Maybe your MO is aware of your insurance's tendencies, and orders tests that will definitely be covered.

I will say that I prefer getting PET scans to getting MRIs, largely because they are peaceful and quiet. But, I can't say that either form of scan has been better at detecting mets for me.

It's not about rather (or not), you trust your DR. It's why your Dr wants you to have an MRI with contrast as opposed to a PET is what is important, not what someone else's Dr feels is needed for them. Only your Dr can tell you the reason for an MRI with contrast is better for you than a PET. Perhaps because it is to be limited to the Abdomen. Don't know.

Some will have CT/MRI (with or without contrast), some will have PET, some will have all of them.

Asking for clarification/Why a particular decision/order/TX is what they are telling you/ordering for you, does not mean that 'you' are not trusting them. It is asking for a more thorough understanding of what is going on/why it is best for you. I could not have trusted my Drs more and did everything they offered me - but I still asked a 'whole group' of questions for my better understanding of MY TX plan.

Divine - I was told that it is not unusual for a PET Scan to show up (light up) on areas of ANY 'inflammation' - so it is not terribly unusual for 'false positives' to be seen. PET is very sensitive and will 'light up' on any area(s) of 'inflammation'. In my case, an area along my lower right jaw 'lit up' on PET. Immediately had biopsies of the area by ENT Dr. Had path. report next day - there was 'nothing' there. The terms 'positive' or 'false positive' were never used with my Drs - just and area 'lit up' that has to be biopsied now and when path was in next day just some inflammation for totally unknown reason. That was 7+ yrs ago.

It is my understanding that a PET cannot DX cancer - it only shows area(s) of possible concern - the biopsy confirms the presence or absence of cancer.

Seems like everybody has different experiences. I had a PET and bone scan following surgery when it was determined I would need chemo. Insurance paid for it as a pre-chemo staging scan. My MO said my chemo treatment plan could be different if cancer was found anywhere else. Made sense to me. The surgeon did a breast MRI before surgery to determine the extent of the disease which she said allowed her to know how much breast tissue to take, and the other scans came after it was determined I would need chemo.

divine - I had a pre-surgical MRI that was a false negative, as there was a positive lymph node that was large enough to have been seen, but was not. Imaging has been problematic for me - mammography missed my palpable 2.6cm tumor, and had previously missed a 3cm ovarian mass prior to hyst/ooph. I had a pre-chemo PET, a post-chemo PET, and a routine PET a couple of years later - all normal. I had a PET this past May, about a week prior to a scheduled surgery to exchange a left tissue expander and swap my existing right implant for a smaller one. This PET lit up like a Christmas tree, bilaterally. Turned out to be a false positive, and this was caused by avid uptake due to loads of inflammation caused by metaplasia, a 3cm suture granuloma at the site of my original tumor, and generalized inflammatory response to the tissue expander. We went ahead with the surgery and the suture granuloma was removed, and other areas biopsied - all normal. I had this PET done in response to results from my BCI test that showed I am high risk for recurrence but receive low benefit from anti-hormonals.