| what would you do? |
|
|
1 2
|
| 1 2
|
|
08/26/2013 18:39
moondanc 
|
08/26/2013 18:39
moondanc
|
Re: what would you do?
stephenp:
I also thought that RT in younger people be of higher risk. However when one adds up lifetime radiation exposure, RT only marginally adds to the cumulative total.
In discussing this with my doctor, his comment was, where someone of 35 depends on their hands to make a living (we were talking about a dentist), RT is clearly a good option as there is a good chance of retaining full function if treated early enough.
RT of both hands worked for me.
In terms of radiation risk there are two considerations. One is the cumulative radiation risk to your entire body. I've not discussed that with a doctor or researched it with regard to RT. The other is the radiation risk of RT to your hands and the possibility of cancer or other disease. Most doctors/radiologists I spoke with said addiing to the load on your total body with RT was too small to calculate and what one needed to do was deal with the risk of RT to the hand. The several radiologists I spoke with and the research I did said *less than 1% risk of developing cancer in the hand as a result of RT over the next 15-20 years." As an older person, that was acceptable. I'm not aware of studies --although they may exist--how the risk can increase--esp. in a younger person-- over 20-40 years. I was also told hand cancer is quite treatable.
I know at some point I saw something on this very website which explained and demonstrated how risk is calculated.
Diane
|
|
|
|
|
08/26/2013 22:49
stephenp 
|
08/26/2013 22:49
stephenp
|
Re: what would you do?
I think we are more or less in agreement!
There is a RT trade off, preservation of function against a theoretical slight increased cancer risk. It is impossible to put a figure on this.
I do note that in the published studies that I have read, there are no reports of hand cancer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 2
|
| 1 2
|
113 users online
Login
