Re: fibroid size DR MC Follow up ? Or any other Dr.
From: Rosemary (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:44:08 -0500 (CDT)
At Wed, 9 Oct 2002, beav wrote:
>Fibroids are rarely, rarely cancerous, and they never "turn" cancerous. MM is dimensional and ML is volume.
--
Rosemary
>At Tue, 8 Oct 2002, William McIntosh, MD wrote:
>>
>Thanks for your reply. If fibroid was measured in ML this time and cm
>or mm last time could that account for the "size change." It was done by
>US so how do I know if it was volume or dimensional change??? And what
>are the chances of fibroid I have had for years turning cancerous????
>Thank you Thank you!!
>
>>At Tue, 8 Oct 2002, beav wrote:
>>>
>>>4 quick question:
>>>
>>>I have a fibroid that went over a years time from 96 to 260 tech said ML
>>>but should it be mm???
>>>
>>>Question is what size in comparison was my fibroid and what is it
>>>now????
>>>
>>>And can that be causing the back pain and pressure and pulling on right
>>>I've been having? Uterus is retrov. and to the left from Fibroid???
>>>
>>>What would your course of treatment be?
>>
>>Actually, the difference is quite critical. Ml would refer to a volume,
>>a relatively new way of quantifying fibroid size, and one that I am not
>>to familiar with. The increase from 96 to 260 cubic mm or ml would not
>>be as great as it sounds. On the other hand, a straight dimensional
>>increase from 96-260 mm would be a huge change, from the size of a
>>softball to the size of a basketball. Fibroids can certainly cause your
>>symptoms. Treatment would depend on what your plans for additional
>>children would be, and how badly you want to rid yourself of the
>>symptoms.
>>
>>--
>>William D. McIntosh, MD, FACOG
>>
>>This is for educational purposes only, and is not a substitute
>>for consultation and examination by a licensed medical professional.
>>
![[ Women's Health Forum ]](http://www.obgyn.net/images_women/wh-forum.gif)