full body CT scans

[generallobster]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Question for all of you in radiology, or who know enough to answer: Do you think those full body CT scans that are now offered to the public through private companies are helpful as a preventitive measure? I hear them advertised on the radio, and they use scare tactics such as an old lady's testamony that a symptomless golfball sized tumor was removed as a result of detection by the scan. What they offer is a CT scan for something like 500-1000 dollars and then a consultation afterwards with a radiologist (I assume) to go over the results. If a person has no symptoms, of how much value is the scan since the doctor has no specific area to focus on? Since it is something one pays for privatly, it isn't burdening the healthcare system, but would you recomend it or is it just a scam? Just curious.

 

[russellb]

Do you think those full body CT scans that are now offered to the public through private companies are helpful as a preventitive measure?

There is no data that I'm aware of to suggest that full body screening CT is of significant value as a preventative measure.

If a person has no symptoms, of how much value is the scan since the doctor has no specific area to focus on?

Probably not much. More likely that we'll end up chasing benign incidentalomas.

Since it is something one pays for privatly, it isn't burdening the healthcare system, but would you recomend it or is it just a scam?

It's a cash grab capitalising on 'worried well' baby boomers who will spend every last dollar in hopes of preventing an untimely death.

 

[Docxter]

Question for all of you in radiology, or who know enough to answer: Do you think those full body CT scans that are now offered to the public through private companies are helpful as a preventitive measure? I hear them advertised on the radio, and they use scare tactics such as an old lady's testamony that a symptomless golfball sized tumor was removed as a result of detection by the scan. What they offer is a CT scan for something like 500-1000 dollars and then a consultation afterwards with a radiologist (I assume) to go over the results. If a person has no symptoms, of how much value is the scan since the doctor has no specific area to focus on? Since it is something one pays for privatly, it isn't burdening the healthcare system, but would you recomend it or is it just a scam? Just curious.

Actually the "hype" of whole body scanning has decreased considerably in the past two years since the American College of Radiology made a statement that it's not proven to be scientifically beneficial. Many of these screening health clinic companies have since closed or significantly limited their scope and market presence. If you want the pros and cons of this type of screening, do a literature search. Nevetheless, there are trials going on to determine the efficacy of certain types of screening, e.g. lung ca.

For the time being, both groups who say it's lifesaving measure and those who say it's just a money-grabbing scam are wrong. More research is needed. I still remember the people making fun of PSA as a way for prostate cancer screening a few years ago and calling a scam.

 

[russellb]

For the time being, both groups who say it's lifesaving measure and those who say it's just a money-grabbing scam are wrong.

Anyone who charges patients hundreds of $$ claiming that the full body CT scans are lifesavers is involved in a cash grab ( OK , not necessarily a 'scam', per se). Given the lack of evidence supporting full body scan efficacy (and I'm talking about full body CT, not CT thorax in high risk groups), promoting them at significant cost to the consumer is, in my mind, unethical. Now, if you're telling patients who come to you requesting a scan, and willing to pay big $$, that the scans are not proven to be effective (this certainly happens to giants in CT like Elliot Fishman, etc..--- I've witnessed it) and they still want the scan, or if a patient is getting a full body CT as part of a research protocol, then it's a different story.

But telling patients to pay for these because they are a 'lifesaver' in the absence of supporting evidence is unethical at the very least, and IMHO, a cash grab. I can tell you that this opinion is shared by the head of my provincial Radiology association (he's a partner in my group), and a recent past president of the Canadian Association of Radiologists, who was a mentor of mine during residency.