Two opinions....same surgical procedure, but one says W&W

[MBrennan]

Second opinion in -- good news -- but a bit of a dilemma.  Thankfully, the second opinion confirmed the first in terms of the surgical approach (tranlab).  This was reassuring.  However, second opinion said wait and watch for six months -- first opinion said have the surgery in the next 6-8 months.  Suggestions? 

[MBrennan]

Wow, no opinions from ANYONE on this?  Help!

[Jim Scott]

Hi ~

In most cases, acoustic neuromas are slow-growing, however, occasionally they do have growth 'spurts'. 

I would suggest that you talk to the doctor that advised you to have surgery immediately (we'll call him 'Doctor A') and ask: why the urgency?  He may have a good reason but then again, maybe not.  If he has what you consider a good reason to have the surgery soon, ask the 'Watch-and-Wait doctor' (we'll call him' Dr. B') why he thinks it's O.K. to wait (without giving him the first doctor's opinion).  Then, you'll have both doctor's rationale for their opinion and, one hopes, be able to make a more informed decision.  I hope this helps.

Jim

[New girl]

Hi HBrennan,

Sorry you did not get many replies.  Sometimes there are a lot of new messages on this board so I know I dont catch all of them. 

I agree with Jim that it would be helpful to find out why "Doctor A" felt a need to have surery done soon.  In reading this forum I have seen that it is not uncommon for different doctors to give different opinions on the path to take.  My advice would be to get as much info as you can to make an informed decision that you feel comfortable with.  I am not sure if you have gotten info on radiation.  Several people on this site have had good results.

[CHD63]

Hi MBrennan .....

Sorry I did not reply to your post.     No good excuses ..... several lame reasons.

One of the big dilemmas on this whole decision-making process comes when you have conflicting opinions from respected medical professionals.  Each one of them has his/her own philosophy on when the optimum time for treatment is, based on what is seen in the MRI.  If I were in your situation, I would send my MRI and most recent audiogram to a couple more physicians who are experienced in the treatment of ANs for additional opinions.  Then, there comes a point at which you simply need to trust your own intuition ..... gut, if you will.  What seems logical and makes sense to you will surface.

Many thoughts and prayers!

Clarice

[leapyrtwins]

Watching and waiting is an approach that lots more docs are taking these days.

It's becoming more popular in the States; it's been the norm in Europe for years.

How large is your AN?

Jan

[frenchjoey]

Hi MBrenann,
Like everyone says, it will be your own decision in the end. You will go along with the doctor you end up trusting more than the others.

W&W has been the norm in France for some time. But ..... but ......we have two main GK facilities and the doctor in charge of one of them does insist that the sooner you have treatment the better. He justifies this by saying that patients whose hearing has not yet been damaged stand a good chance of it staying that way whereas you never know what the AN will decide to do all of a sudden while you're waiting. This is exactly what happened to me. I lost my hearing on the AN side during summer and the tinnitus and hyperacousis settled in and now I'm stuck with them.
Mind you it might have happened anyway and I would have blamed GK. I will never know.

But I think you get treatment really fast in the States whereas here I had to wait 4 months during which things got worse and worse.
Keep us posted
Joey