Folks,
Hello, this is my first post. I was diagnosed about two weeks ago with a 2.9 cm AN on my left side. I am a 30 year old male. The tumor was discovered quite by accident- I had the flu for 5 days straight, and went to see my PCP complaining of fevers, night sweats, headaches, and a stiff neck. He immediately sent me to George Washington University Hospital to rule out meningitis. Once I got to the ER, my headache had subsided a bit and I was joking around with the hospital staff, so they quickly ruled out meningitis without having to do a spinal tap, which was all good. However, the doctors decided to do a CT scan to rule out an anuerysm 'while they had me there.' So, long story short, they find a big meatball in my brain, admit me to the ICU overnight, do the MRI, and make the diagnosis. Currently I have absolutely no symptoms whatsoever- zero hearing loss, no balance problems, vertigo, facial numbness, etc. My consulting neurosurgeon, Dr. Caputy, told me that, given the size of the tumor, I still have the option for radiosurgery. He also laid out all of the depressing statistics with regards to hearing retention, facial paralysis, etc related to microsurgery. We were warned in advance that the guy had no bedside manner whatsoever, but what he was telling us came as no less a kick in the stomach. My wife has a friend who is a neuro-oncologist down at Mayo in Jacksonville, FL, and she sent a copy of my MRI's down to him and he had his staff take a look and he presented each of them with the question- if this were your son or daughter, what form of treatment would you opt for? Both of them opted for microsurgical recision. Quite frankly, I'm completely confused as to why they would prefer this option over radiosurgery given everything I've read about microsurgery the possible side effects, consequences, and outcomes. They say the tumor is pressing on my brain stem, so I'm guessing that, along with my age, is why they're leaning towards that approach. After all, if I can expect to live another 60 years, and given the size of the tumor right now, maybe the best approach is to remove it all together, and given my age maybe they expect my recovery process to go a bit more smoothly than someone who's a bit older.
But really, I'm just hoping someone here can shed a little light on this for me- if I'm looking at a 4-5 week minimum recovery time for microsurgery, plus the hearing loss, high risk of long-term, if not permanant facial paralysis, balance problems, etc., then why on Earth would anyone choose such an option over radiosurgery or FSR?
Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this and your support. I've always been a 'stop crying and start finding a solution' kind of guy, and I'm really trying to approach this issue in the same manner, but it's still pretty hard not to get overwhelmed sometimes when I think that my quality of life may be forever diminished by this.