cbdheartman
Well-known member
Sorry for another post.
I just tracked down the report from my 2004 CT Scan and sent for the films. Obviously, i don't have the films yet, but this is what the report says about the aorta:
The diameters of the thoracic aorta at the root, at the ascending aorta, at the arch, and at the ascending aorta are normal.
Now the report doesn't define what normal is. Does anyone think this has any value? What is normal? If normal is 32-37 mm as defined in another report, this seems like a significant data point to consider. From 2004 to 2006 I went from normal to 4.8. Now I am at 4.9.
Thoughts? Or am I reading too much into that report. (I wish it gave an actual diameter.)
I just tracked down the report from my 2004 CT Scan and sent for the films. Obviously, i don't have the films yet, but this is what the report says about the aorta:
The diameters of the thoracic aorta at the root, at the ascending aorta, at the arch, and at the ascending aorta are normal.
Now the report doesn't define what normal is. Does anyone think this has any value? What is normal? If normal is 32-37 mm as defined in another report, this seems like a significant data point to consider. From 2004 to 2006 I went from normal to 4.8. Now I am at 4.9.
Thoughts? Or am I reading too much into that report. (I wish it gave an actual diameter.)
