Hello, my question will be lengthy, please bear with me. Here goes.
Back in January of 2015, I noticed a very tiny spot of brown discharge, only on paper and one time on my panties, well, being post-menopausal for approximately 3 years, I decided to investigate it. I called the local clinic here, (I live in New Zealand, but am an American citizen), they ran the usual test, you know, the pap smears, etc, all came back normal. So, I was referred for a TVultra sound. Here is what was discovered:
Both transabdominal and transvaginal scans were performed.
Uterus: anteverted, normal size, longitudinal 65mm, AP 34 mm, Transverse 55 m. Volume 57 mL
Myometrium: Heterogeneous with 5 fibroids. Largest=subserosal and posterior, measuring 15mm. None has any significant submucosal involvement.
Endometrium: normal appearance, 4.9 mm. No focal abnormality or abnormal vascularity.
Pouch of Douglas: No free fluid.
Now, here is what scared me and still does:
Right Adnexa: 39mm mass containing low level echoes, reasonly homogeneous. There is an echogenic rim. No vascularity demonstrated within it. Right ovary is not separate from this.
Left ovary: Contains a 10mm follicle, volume 2.1 mL. No other adnexal abnormality.
Comments: Endometrial thickness approaching the upper limits of normal. Right Adnexal mass appears to be solid. We are unable to determine it to be a pedunculated fibroid.
Fibroid Uterus changes elsewhere.
Recommend review by gyn specialist for advice on management in view of the complex of changes.
So, I am then referred to the Christchurch women's hospital, there, they do another ultra sound, this time, it was scarier, here is what it says:
Endometrium noted to be around 7mm and poorly defined, the right adnexal lesion was joted to be persisten measuring 38x39x42mm, with a hetergenous echotexture but no internal vascularity and note has made that this did not move separately to the uterus. The right ovary was not identified separate from the mass but the left ovary was not identified either at this stage. A review of the imaging results was made at a multi-disciplinary meeting on March 25th with possible aetiologies being those of a pedunculated fibroid or a possible ovarian mass such as a fibroma with the noted endometrial thickness again commented upon and a plan for surgery is now suggested. Recommendation of a hysteroscopy, dilatation and curettage with a concurrent diagnostic laprascopy proceeding to a salpingo-oophorectomy or removal of pelvic mass with the option of a bilaterial salpingo-oophorectomy after a further pre-operative discussion in the Gyn Outpatient Clinic.
Ok, so I am concerned over the fact that the hospital ultra sound says that my uterus is poorly defined, the first ultra sound, done at a womens only ultra sound clinic, said it was clear. Also, the thickness, how can it be 4.9 one month and then 7 the next? Of course, that dang mass has me very worried.
I had a CA 125 done, it was 16.
I was planning on moving back to the states that June, so, I had originally canceled any further treatment as they had me on a 4 to 5 month wait list for the procedures, I figured it could not be too bad if they wanted to wait. Well, when I told them I was leaving, I got this letter informing me I could come in earlier, and have it all done in May, before I left. My husband, a kiwi, was all for it. You see, we do not pay a cent for any of this; it would cost us a good chunk of change back home.
I decided against the surgery anyway, never did return to the states however. So, about 2 years later, decided to re-open the case. The gyn said he consulted with the doctor in Christchurch, and since it had been almost 2 years, they wanted another ultra sound. So, off to the hospital here in Nelson I went. I had a very conscientious tech this time, she took a long time. At the end, she said it all looked good. Here are the readings for that one: