Would your doctor of performed a bronchoscopy on me?

[LouLou]

As you may have read in my blog:

<b><i>"My perinatologist (high risk OBGYN) is very surprised I've never been bronched to look at my lungs for the cause of my hemoptysis that I sometimes battle with daily for months at a time. She is going to talk with another doctor for a second opinion but I get the idea if she were in control of my CF she'd like an embolization before pregnancy because putting me under while pregnant isn't too pretty. As we know better than she, if embolization was an easy, and a sure fire way of curing hemoptysis it wouldn't be such a popular topic on this site." </i></b>

Here's my question for you guys - do you feel your doctor would have investigated this further with a bronch or other test? Keep in mind I've never coughed more than 3 teaspoons of pure blood at a time.

Thanks!

 

[my65roses4me]

<span style=" font-size: x-small;">Just to answer your question,
yes my Dr would of bronched me to find out where the problem is
coming from. I say this because I have been there. His reason for
doing a bronch was to know where its coming from just in case it
gets worse, and that way if need be they can ebolize it faster. I
dont think my Dr would be so quick to embolize it when its not more
than you have coughed up though. But if you plan on getting
pregnant it might be good to do to prevent it from getting much
worse while you are pregnant.<br>
But in my case the embolizations never took very good because I
would grow veins right next to the embolized one and the new one
would bleed. But I think that is rare.<br>
Just my thoughts

 

[anonymous]

Same.. The 1st time I coughed up blood I had a bronch!!! and Its hasn't happened to much since just a little streaking. But definatly get it figured out you don't want to become anemic or something

 

[thelizardqueen]

The first time I coughed up blood (which keep in mind was cups at a time), my doctor suggested that if the bleeding didn't stop he would bronch me, but didn't want to right away, because as we all know there can be complications from a bronch. Its rare, but it does happen. But seeing as how the bleeding didn't stop (I coughed up about half a cup each sitting, and coughed daily for 2 months), he performed the bronch. That being said it did me no good. He didn't see anything wrong with my lungs to be causing the bleeding. So needless to say I continued with the hemoptysis for another month (this was one month in), and my doc finally decided to do an embolization knowing nothing going in.

 

[Diane]

My story is similar to Liz's. My doctor had both my embolizations done without knowing what to look for. The first time i was embolized no-one suggested a bronch, then when i had my second bad bleed my doctor wanted one and i refused because the idea of a bronch scares the crap out of me ( i've never had one). When i went in for the embolization the intervention radiologist said he was glad i didnt get a bronch done because he doesnt like them done on cf patients. I have no idea why he said that, but i am guessing because like Liz said, they can have complications( one of them being bleeding ). Only difference with my second embolization is.... The hemoptysis started again while he was doing the embolization, and it showed up on the screen as a white dot, which gave the intervention radiologist an accurate area to work on, scary as it was, it was also sort of relieving to know the offending area was being offensive at the right time.

 

[anonymous]

Yep, my daughters doc would have done a bronch too. They do yearly bronchs until the age of five, because they cannot produce produce enough sputem for a culture.

I say ask to have one done, its a good way to see what's happening inside.

Good luck!

 

[thelizardqueen]

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>Diane</b></i>

Only difference with my second embolization is.... The hemoptysis started again while he was doing the embolization, and it showed up on the screen as a white dot, which gave the intervention radiologist an accurate area to work on, scary as it was, it was also sort of relieving to know the offending area was being offensive at the right time.</end quote></div>

The same happened for me. While the embolization was being performed I had an episode that showed up on the screen, that way the radiologist actually saw where the bleeding was coming from once they had inserted the cathetar and had started to look around.

 

[littledebbie]

Uhmm I'm not sure, as I don't do this on the regular basis that you
do.  But my impression has always been that if the amount
isn't huge and it's not just straight blood like a cup full.
 Then their not too worried.  However, that seems like a
long time...and I can see why she might think it should be checked
into before your pregnant and delivery is upon you etc.<br>
<br>
I guess I think I don't think it's crazy or irresponsible for your
doc not to have done it.  I mean obviously your lungs are
healing whatever is the cause of the bleeding since it's not a huge
amount. No, the more I think of it.  I think my Doc. would
have classified that under "every patient is different"
and as long their was no danger or extreme change he would leave it
alone.  But if I was looking at doing something like get
pregnant or have some surgery he might consider it then.  I
think anyway.... we need dial a Doc on this forum <img src="i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif" border="0">

 

[anonymous]

My doc is against doing bronch's. He prefers emoblizations.

John