Option #1: Try a round of steroids for a few weeks and then do an MRI. If the growth shrinks, we know it is inflammatory. If it doesn't we know it is a tumor but we don't know what kind of tumor.
PROS - cost less, less invasive, can start right away
CONS - will gain weight, will raise blood sugar that would potentially send me into the diabetic range (recap from a previous post: I am considered prediabetic. Nobody knows why because I have ZERO risk factors.)
Option #2: Do a biopsy which entails going through my nose, through the actual pituitary to the stalk. Fat from my stomach will then be taken to patch the hole that this would create so that cerebral fluid does not continue to leak out. As I have found out cerebral fluid leaks are BAD NEWS. I will then stay in the hospital for a couple of days.
PROS - I will know exactly what it is.
CONS - I will most likely lose my thyroid function and cortisol. I cannot schedule it until the middle of November. Costly, I'm sure.
Now, it is possible that I may have to do both options. For example, if I chose to do steroids first and they don't work, I would then have to to do the biopsy to see what kind of tumor I have because you treat them differently depending on the type. And vice versa, if I chose to do the biopsy first I could find out the growth is, in fact, inflammatory which would mean steroid treatment. The doctor says he could go either way and it's up to me. He doesn't feel like one is better than the other.
Here is one of my biggest frustrations, my endocrinologist had already mentioned these two options but knowing the cons of both, he didn't know which way to go. He referred me to the neurosurgeon to basically make that decision. So, in reality, going to the neurosurgeon really didn't give me any more answers because he came up with the same options and left it up to me. The only thing he did say is not to wait, that I should pick one of these two options.
So, if anybody has an opinion, either way, I'd love to hear it.
No comments:
Post a Comment