MY ORIGINAL POST WAS IN JULY 2007

[agnes]

Happy New Year everyone, its been a while since I've posted. I am coming up on 6 months since my original AN diagnosis.  To refresh, I went to see Dr. Antonelli
in Gainesville last August 13th and he put me on watch and wait.  He suggested I wait 1 year to have a follow up MRI, however I would feel better having it
checked in 6 months just so that I can see if there is any major growth, etc.  I have a different insurance company now, so the physicians I went to last year, both
my ENT and the Neurosurgeon are no longer on my list of physicians.  I am seriously thinking about having my MRI done, which can be ordered by my primary
physician, and then going to make an appointment to see Dr. Eric Gabriel, whom is a neurosurgeon here in Florida to have a consultation, or second opinion as you
will. There is someone on one of my earlier posts who had their surgery done by Dr. Gabriel, but I would have to go back and reference who it was.  My tinnitus
is back slightly...once I had my MRI last year, the tinnitus seemed to disappear.  I don't know it this might mean that there is growth, or its something that just
comes and goes? I do have some slight vertigo at times which I never experienced last year at all, but other than that, no other symptoms other than my hearing
loss.  Is it important that I have another hearing test after my MRI.  Is the extent of hearing loss important to a neurosurgeon or radiologist. I imagine it would
be if a procedure was being scheduled to determine the best way to preserve what hearing is still there. I think last year I had a 20 percent hearing loss in my
left ear, which is where my AN is. I would have to get the report from the ENT on the actual stats.   

[Larry]

Agnes,

Certainly have the regular MRI - I had mine 6 monthly for the 2 years post re-growth but now annually.

As for the hearing test. i think that process is the biggest scam of all. The only reason that I can think of for having it pre treatment is to confirm to the neuro the type of op to have. Translab will take out your hearing permanently whereas other types of ops have some hearing preservation potential.

The % loss etc is a waste of space imo, you know whether you can hear ok or not or whether your hearing is a waste of space. And more so post op. i reckon the neuro should pay for that because again, you know whether your hearing is better or worse, it is more for the neuro's stats than anything else.

i did have a hearing test (free under insurance) and they told me that i had virtually no hearing in my AN ear. WOW, A BRILLIANT OBSERVATION. YEAH RIGHT. I was a fool to waste my time having that test done. I know I have no hearing or virtually none in my AN ear. What was the outcome of that test - well, 5 years later I'm still wondering myself. They wanted me
to do another hearing test when i went for my last MRI - well, guess what i told them they could do with their hearing test (lol)

You know whether your hearing is getting worse or not, unless you have lots of spare time and the cost is nothing, then it is a waste of space 9well it was for me anyway).

if your hearing is getting worse then you may want to look at treatment of whatever sort to try and preserve your hearing as you have it because it will not get better, only worse.

laz