It sounds like your doctor is correct that SPECT imaging is cheaper and less detailed than PET imaging, but it is also more widely available.
Posted by sometimesdilly (Member # 9982) on :
hey docdave-
there is nothing "cheap" about a SPECT scan. Many of us have had to fight tooth and nail to get insurance pre-auth to have one done. Good SPECTS can provide enough evidence to strongly (though not definitively) support a Lyme diagnosis.
PET's are a much precise scan, but also far more expensive and thus more difficult for insurance companies to justify.
Also, I could be wrong, but i don't think a PET can provide definitive proof of active Lyme,so depending on what the goal is in having a scan done, SPECTs can ve just as useful as PETs.
dilly
Posted by Cobweb (Member # 10053) on :
Hey Davey-can only speak from my personal experience.
I had a PET scan done for tracking cancer. Injected with radioisotope(sp) which cancer "eats" or takes up. After injection body is scanned for hot spots.
For my SPECT scan I was also injected with whatever they inject you with and then had brain scan to map blood flow.
Have had several MRI's of back and head. Injected with whatever, then shoved into the clanking machine. It was just for pictures and diagnosis.
Think I glow in the dark???
I do believe the PET is the newest of the tests, but I don't know if it will show what SPECT scan does.
I only know use of PET scan for cancer, not blood flow.
BTW- I am cancer free-now, maybe a little lopsided but what the hey- I am ALIVE.