First off, no, the infection wasn't back. Secondly, there was evidently some miscommunication between the first vet and the second vet, a.k.a the biopsy vet who might be able to tell us more about what's wrong; the first vet told us (at least twice) that the second vet had already received the dog's info and would call us when they had reviewed it, while the second vet had never heard a thing about it. (Apparently, when the first vet said she'd faxed over the labwork to the second vet, she was thinking of faxing her order over to the pizza delivery joint or something.) But we finally got the papers exchanged and the appointment made.
The results are not encouraging, on more than one level.
The second vet sounds reasonably certain that the liver "mass" (which the first vet referred to merely as "nodules") was cancerous, and it had increased significantly in size since the first vet's exam. The bloodwork - which the first vet told us wasn't worrisome - was evidently worrisome after all. He still wanted to perform a highly invasive procedure to confirm the diagnosis, a procedure that sounded like it was remarkably risky and likely to cause problems without actually helping the dog much. We kept getting the runaround on whether or not treatment options would be worthwhile in his condition, or if the liver issues were responsible for his lack of strength in his back leg.(They don't seem to know why he sometimes can't seem to stand on it, nor do they seem too interested in finding out.)
So, for now, we're going to try some liver supplements; if it's not cancerous, this might resolve the issue. We think. Maybe. If it's really his liver causing his problems and not an infected appendix or ingrown nostril hairs or something else they haven't bothered to tell us about but will happily charge us through the nose to consider.
Why, yes, I'm just a wee bit cynical that the vets seem to be deliberately obscuring the facts in order to play referral tag and siphon off as much money as possible without actually helping the dog. Why do you ask?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The runaround you are getting sucks. :(
It may be that the dog can't walk on that leg because of some pain radiating from the growth? Even if it's not right next to the leg, it could be possibly pinching a nerve.
Uninfuli: those responsible for deliberately withholding important information
Irresponsible of them. With more and more people saying "whatever it takes!" when it comes to their pets, though, they may be going on that basis. Or, of course, they're afraid of suit. Still, it would be nice to see some consideration of the poor animal!!
coodger: a cranky old male turtledove
We have no idea what's causing the leg issue, and they just tossed out some random possibilities - including neurological problems - without indicating how we would figure out what it was or how we would go about treating it. It's hard to believe it's not related to the liver, though.
And, yeah, my primary bone to pick is that the dog's well being is evidently low on their priority list, compared to what they can charge us for. We were assured that they could do a relatively inexpensive needle biopsy, but that story changed once we got up to the second vet. A four-figure invasive surgery that won't do more than cut him open and likely worsen internal bleeding (which he may or may not have)... and make it that much harder for him to walk on top of it? He's also no spring chicken to be knocked out and sliced up for little to no good reason. If they thought they could get the mass/nodules out in one go, that would be one thing, but they'd just be opening him up for the sake of opening him up.
I'm really hoping this dog pulls off his own holiday miracle and comes through... just so he can bite the money-grubbing jerks on the rear ends for New Year's.
Post a Comment