The ghost of 1974 reared it's ugly head again!

[MDemisay]

See what you all think:

I don't feel so special or unique anymore. In 1974, I had 3 AVM's removed and over 70 metal clips put in. This afternoon when I was in Dr. Sisti's office he revealed that he had a theory about why I had developed an Acoustic Neuroma in 2004 in the very same brain that the AVM's were in. For 8 years now that has remained an extremely unlucky coincidence that nobody could seem to explain.....

Until now...apparently I had received radiation exposure in the form of angiograms,embolizations, and fractionated radiation at the age of 17 and before. My doc doesn't think it's pure coincidence that I developed this tumor!

The point is now he wants to treat it with Gamma Knife surgery, I know that technology has come a long way since the early 70's.

In the 90's I was using a cell phone in the ear I lost the hearing in it was one of the earlier models ( not the bricks but it was one of the digital ones)!

Which do you think is the better explanation or is it a combination of both?

Mike

[Jim Scott]

Mike ~

This is pure speculation on my part but I don't believe your radiation exposure or cell phone use was a salient factor in your AN development, but I don't hold a medical degree of any kind so my opinion is worth about what you paid for it and, of course, I could be wrong.   

Jim

[MDemisay]

Jim,

You seem to have missed my point entirely, when I made it initially.

Perhaps, I was too obtuse and my point wasn't apparent. Let me put it differently, the Doctor that would treat this would best be able to answer. But what are your thoughts re: the reexposure to radiation would it be harmful? He wants to bombard the tumor with (12gy) radiation?

Mike

[Jim Scott]

Mike ~

I apologize for the misunderstanding.

You're right, it's definitely a question for the doctor.  I received 27 Gy of radiation (via FSR) but was 63 at the time and did not have a history of receiving much radiation until that time.  The effects of irradiation (under medical supervision) are not perfectly understood but the move seems to be away from the old beliefs that radiation treatment is only for those over 60.  My radiation oncologist was very exact and informed me that I would receive the absolute minimum 'dose' of radiation - very specifically targeted - that would still be effective.  I suffered no side effects and the FSR did it's job of destroying my remaining remaining tumor's DNA and thus, it's ability to re-grow.  Mission accomplished! 

Six years later, I'm fine and I doubt the radiation had any long-term negative effect on me.  However, this is anecdotal and not 'scientific' proof of anything.  Again, we can speculate but your doctor should be your most credible source of information on this important issue. 

Jim