Thanks Nikki.  My doctor got the report on Friday.  She was going to talk to me about it when she got her copy, but she was confused also and is going to talk to the Radiologist before we can talk.  Hopefully, she will have the first radiologist redo the report and makes some sense out of it.

I would call and ask that someone call you to explain the diff. in the two reports. After they explain it have your notes ready for everything you question. My nephrologist mixed me up with another patient once (because their paperwork was put in my file - same name).

My first thought this Radiologist is slipping or not looking very hard because he also noted in his findings: "Lung bases clear.  Liver, gallbaldder, spleen, pancreas, adrenals, KIDNEYS and abdominal aorta are within normal limits."  Fact is, I have a deformed pelvic kidney, it is not high up under my ribs, it is low in my pelvic region, it faces backward and is shaped like a triangle rather than a kidney, previous doctors believed the huge serous cystadenoma I had removed in October knocked it down there.

Okay, at least I had some info, but after the next CT Scan taken this last Tuesday, I am now even more confused.  Wondering, even though it was a second Radiologist, if they ever really pay attention.  This one writes in this comparative CT Scan report:  "CT examination of the abdomen and pelvis performed with contrast compared to previous examination demonstrates normal size of the liver and spleen.  there is a very tiny cyst seen inteh liver just superior to the portal vein.  This is unchanged in retrospect to previous examination.  Even a smaller cyst laterally in the right lobe is unchanged".  Okay, what is he comparing this to, the first CT scan mentions nothing about cysts on my liver?  He goes on to state:  "The gallbladder is normal in appearance.  The pancreas is unremarkable.  The adrenal glands are normal in appearance.  The KIDNEYS demonstrate symmetric excretion of contrast".  There is that damn kidney(s) being noted again when it is not possilbe!  He further continues:  "No hydronephrosis is demonstrated.  The bowel loops are nondilated and obstructed in appearance particularly in the left lower quadrant.  Where previous inflammatory type process was described there is apparent resolution of this finding on the current exam.  The cystic structure seen anteriorly in the left adnexa is also much smaller in size which may represent a resolving lymphocele.  Resolving ovarian cyst is not excluded.  The urinary bladder is normal in appearance".  WAIT... if Nora is reading, not all of us who have had hysterectomies are urine drenched nothings!  Further stating:  "No free fluid is identified.  The appendix is seen in the right lower quadrant demonstrating air and barium without evidence of inflammatory changes".  His IMPRESSON:  "1.  Resolution of inflammatory process in the left lower quadrant is suggested.  2.  Small cyst anterior left pelvis is also much smaller insize.  3.  Appendix is normal in appearance.  (WHAT THE HE-double toothpicks does that have to do with anything in either CT Scan?)  4.  Two very small hepatic cyst are suggested and unchanged."    

Okay, while a small amount of this second report seems like a comparison to my fist CT Scan, does it still sound to you like he may have been looking at the wrong CT SCAN?  If it is in comparison to my first, why in the he.. wouldn't he do the measurments of the cysts to show the decreased size?  Why would he refer to inflammation in the second report rather than a diverticular abscess noted in the first - they are not the same?  He doesn't seem to note anthing about the second cyst found in the first report (although he does point out liver cysts), but he does say, Resolving ovarian cyst is not exclued.  What does that mean... I don't have any ovaries anymore?  He couldn't be referring to the cystadenoma in October could he.  

I may sound frustrated, but I am almost past that, right now, I am just LMAO - - this just sounds so much like a big lazy blurb and someone was not paying attention.