Lab results - looking for opinions [PLEASE READ 1ST POST]

Could someone please provide some more detailed information regarding where exactly one goes for a semen analysis at the Petrov clinic? I need to know where to hand in the referral and what the actual procedure looks like once I bring the sample in. My husband went by himself two weeks ago, but he basically vanished into thin air amidst the massive crowd—especially all the women in the waiting room. I'm starting to wonder if he even walked through the right doors... I've been trying to call the lab at Petrov to clarify, but of course, the lines are constantly busy... help...

Rachel Ramos36 said:Can anyone help me out with some details? I need to know where to go for a spermogram at the hospital in Newark, where to hand in the referral, and basically what the whole procedure is when you bring in the sample. My husband went by himself two weeks ago, but he totally vanished from the crowd—especially since there were so many women in the waiting room. I'm just wondering if he even walked through the right doors... I've been trying to call the lab in Newark, but obviously, the line is busy... help...

So, once you pull into the hospital courtyard (not where the transfusion medicine lab is at the main building, but the actual courtyard of the Newark hospital), head left past the ramp. Bypass the main building, and you'll see another building off to the right—basically, it's tucked behind the main one. There are some small stairs; climb those and walk into the building, and the lab is right there straight ahead. That's where you turn in the paperwork. Just a heads up, they don't take samples brought in from home anymore; you have to hand over the referral first, wait to be called, and then provide the sample there. Also, it's probably best if you guys skip sex or anything else for 2-3 days before the test so the results are actually legit.

My drawing sucks, but hopefully this helps 😬

Thank you so much for the assistance; that diagram is more than excellent... I think I will have to proceed with it. Just let me know if the referral should be submitted online or if there is a specific physical drop-off point or office where they collect them... given my tendency to submit everything digitally, I want to make sure I hold back if that's the protocol... I just really hope we won't be waiting too long... THANK YOU!!!!!

Rachel Ramos36 said:Just tell me, do you hand the referral in to be typed up, or is there some little bin or spot where they leave them? Since I have this habit of typing everything out, I want to know if I should just hold back if that's how it works... I'm just hoping we won't be waiting forever... THANKS!!!!!

Yeah, there’s a little shelf right by the door where you drop the referral off; you just leave it there and wait for them to call you. My guy waited maybe like half an hour. Then he went to go give a sample in the restroom—they actually have magazines in there too, in case he needs one. 😬

Well, you can actually just bring your sample from home in a sterile specimen cup. There really isn't any need to do it there at the clinic. I guess doing it at home might even be better.

Not at Petrova anymore. You have to submit everything there; they aren't letting you bring stuff from home.

restlessangler said:Diagnosis: G44 Headaches, etc.
Requested scan: Brain MRI

Radiology report and opinion:
On the brain MRI, using standard imaging techniques across multiple planes, the organization of the cerebral gyri and sulci appears normal, with an appropriate relationship between gray and white matter.
Signal intensities of the brain parenchyma—both infra and supratentorial—are physiological. There are no signs of ischemia, intracranial hemorrhage, or any tumor processes.
The ventricular system is centrally located and morphologically appropriate.
Near the dorsal part of the adenohypophysis, a cystic formation measuring about 6-7mm is visible—it is recommended to follow up with a targeted examination of the pituitary-hypothalamic region.
No visible pathological changes in the parasellar regions, pontocerebellar angles, or the craniocervical junction.

I had the first MRI back in May, then last week I had a pituitary MRI based on those findings:

In the pituitary MRI, viewed in three planes (native T1 and T2, plus post-contrast), the pituitary gland is normally positioned with regular shape and size, though there is a cystic formation measuring 7.7x4.9 mm located posteriorly on the left. The pituitary stalk is mid-resistant and normal.

The pituitary shows a homogeneous, regular structure with the aforementioned cystic formation noted on the native slices.

Parasellar and suprasellar areas show no changes. The optic chiasm and cavernous sinus look normal.

In the sequences following IV contrast application, the pituitary enhances homogeneously, except for the described cystic formation, which does not take up the contrast.

I know I'm just a layperson, but it feels like this second scan was totally unnecessary since nothing "new" really showed up besides the dimensions... Am I missing something, or did the doctor who wrote the report go off track? Why bother with this whole second test if nothing new was found—unless I'm right about it being a cyst at the back, while the first scan placed it near the adenohypophysis...
I'm honestly feeling pretty discouraged by all of this...
Is there anything actually new in these results?

restlessangler said:I had an MRI done back in month 9, and then last week I had this pituitary MRI based on those previous results:

On the pituitary MRI—viewed in three planes, both natively with T1 and T2, and post-contrast—the pituitary gland itself is normally positioned with regular shape and size, though there is a cystic formation measuring 7.7x4.9 mm located posteriorly on the left. The pituitary stalk is regular and shows no resistance.

The pituitary exhibits a homogeneous, normal structure, with the aforementioned cystic formation noted on the native slices at the posterior aspect.

The parasellar and suprasellar regions show no changes. The optic chiasm and cavernous sinus appear normal.

Following the administration of contrast, the pituitary shows homogeneous enhancement, except for the described cystic formation, which does not take up the contrast.

I know I’m just a layperson, but it feels like this scan was totally unnecessary since nothing "new" appears besides the dimensions. Am I wrong here, or did the doctor who wrote this miss the mark? Why even do this second scan if nothing new was discovered—unless I'm right about the cyst being on the posterior side while the first scan placed it in the adenohypophysis area?
I'm honestly so disappointed by all this..
Is there anything actually new in these results?

He didn't miss the mark.
When you undergo a pituitary MRI (or really any specific imaging, for that matter), you have to understand what the goal is—what are we trying to prove or rule out?
If there is a suspicion of a microadenoma, a pituitary MRI is performed specifically to confirm its presence. While a standard brain MRI might pick it up, it can be unreliable because the pituitary is such a tiny structure; therefore, you need a targeted, specialized view. It also allows doctors to see how it relates to surrounding structures, which is absolutely vital if surgery ever becomes necessary.

So, the objectives are to:
1. Describe the pituitary, check for pathological changes, and see how it reacts to contrast— which is described in your report
2. Describe the appearance of the infundibulum— which is described in your report
3. Describe the appearance of the optic chiasm— which is described in your report
4. Describe the appearance of the suprasellar region— which is described in your report
5. Describe the appearance of the cavernous sinus— which is described in your report
6. Note any potential abnormalities in the sphenoid sinus, meninges, etc.
🤷

Nothing "new" was found, but one shouldn't expect something entirely different with a microadenoma—the whole point was simply to confirm what was already seen on the brain MRI, for the reasons I mentioned above.

wanderingcobra76 said:It’s not a mistake.
When you get an MRI of the pituitary (or really any scan, for that matter), you have to go in knowing exactly what you're trying to prove or rule out...
If there’s suspicion of a microadenoma, a pituitary MRI is done specifically to confirm its presence—while you might see something on a standard brain MRI, it isn't always reliable because the pituitary itself is so tiny. You need a targeted, specialized view to see how it sits in relation to surrounding structures, which is crucial if surgery ever becomes an option.

So, the goal is to
1. describe the pituitary, checking for any pathological changes and seeing how they react after contrast— your report mentions
2. describe the appearance of the infundibulum— your report mentions
3. describe the optic chiasm— your report mentions
4. describe the suprasellar region— your report mentions
5. describe the cavernous sinus— your report mentions
6. note any potential abnormalities in the sphenoid sinus, the meninges, and so on.
🤷

Nothing new was found here, but honestly, you wouldn't expect anything new with a microadenoma—the whole point was just to confirm what was seen on the initial brain MRI for the reasons I mentioned above...

So how is this "condition" actually treated, and could it be linked to my headaches? Is there even a treatment, or does it just go away on its own?
And how is it possible that the first report said it was in the adenohypophysis, but the second one says it's in the posterior part? I don't understand brain anatomy, but it seems unbelievable that they could miss the mark that much—I mean, I have no idea how big the pituitary is, so I don't know how much room there is for error.

Thanks so much for the reply... I'm feeling a bit frustrated because my headaches are getting worse—I've already had to switch types of painkillers since the old ones aren't working anymore—and I still haven't gotten definitive answers after six months...

restlessangler said:So how is this "condition" actually treated—and could it possibly be linked to my headaches? Is there even a treatment, or will it just clear up on its own?
And how is it possible that the first scan placed it in the adenohypophysis, while the second one says it's in the posterior part? I don't know much about brain anatomy, but it seems almost impossible to miss the mark that significantly (I mean, I have no idea how large the pituitary gland is, so I don't know how much room there is for error).

Thanks so much for the reply. I'm feeling a bit frustrated because these headaches are getting worse—I've already had to switch my medication since the old ones aren't cutting it anymore—yet I still haven't seen any results after six months..

Well, it's located in the posterior part of the adenohypophysis.
It's unlikely to be related to your headaches—unless, of course, there is a significant hormonal imbalance involved.
Pituitary microadenomas are typically managed if they cause issues due to hormone imbalances (mostly through medication; surgery is usually a last resort if the meds can't stabilize the hormones).
So, you really should go through an endocrinology workup.
To be honest, it is quite probable that the microadenoma is just an incidental finding and has absolutely nothing to do with your headaches.

It's also worth being clear that an MRI doesn't always provide the answer as to *why* someone has headaches; rather, its purpose is to rule out specific underlying causes.

wanderingcobra76 said:It's located in the posterior part of the adenohypophysis.
It’s pretty unlikely to be linked to your headaches—unless there’s a significant hormonal imbalance at play.
Pituitary microadenomas are typically treated if they cause issues via hormonal disruption (usually with medication, and surgery is only an option if the meds can't get things back in balance).
So, you definitely need to follow up with an endocrinologist.
Honestly, there's a good chance that microadenoma is just an incidental finding and isn't actually causing those headaches at all.

Also, it’s important to keep in mind that an MRI doesn't always give you a direct answer as to why someone has headaches; its main job is often just to rule out specific underlying causes.

Yeah, I'm heading to the endocrinologist next week for a consultation, and then there will be more tests to check my hormone levels. It feels a bit strange that my neurologist told me straight up that we have to sort out the hormones first (just to check everything) before we can really tackle the headache issue... but oh well. I'll check back in sometime next year once the hormone results are in, and maybe I'll have more clarity then... Thanks so much for the help!!!

Hey everyone, hope you're all doing good.
So,
can someone please help me out here?
I need a translation for these Latin terms—they’re describing some injuries, maybe more or less severe, but I honestly have no clue what I'm looking at;

contusio thoracis, antebrachii, brachii, cruiris bill,
strangulatio colli,
strangulatio antebrachii et cruris.

A translation would be great—and if anyone knows how these might be classified legally (like, minor vs. serious bodily harm?), let me know. That's the goal.

*Also, here's the report from the radiology and ultrasound department:
Findings: cervical spine imaging shows normal, appropriately mineralized vertebral bodies. No signs of acute bone trauma. (Does that mean there aren't any injuries at all?)
Chest imaging shows no visible signs of acute bone trauma on the bones shown.

?

Thanks a ton!

Please analyze this:

MPV 11.5 H

Leukocyte high ref interval 0 at 10.8. Just one of those things, I guess.

SE 27 H

RDW 11.9 L. Just a quick heads-up on that one.

Everything else looks fine.
My doctor told me my leukocyte levels are slightly elevated, claiming it’s just from a cold. Problem is, that cold wrapped up like a month and a half ago.

Do you actually need treatment or more tests?

26 years old. Had some bloodwork done because my neurologist wanted it—apparently, the occasional dizzy spells and those pains in my hands and palms were enough to trigger a look. Based on the exam, he didn't find anything suspicious or anything worth worrying about. Just one of those things, I guess.

Thanks.

Linda Kim30 said:Please analyze:

MPV 11.5 H

Leukocyte high ref interval 0

SE 27 H

RDW 11.9 L

Everything else looks fine.
My doctor told me the elevated leukocytes might just be from a cold, but that was over a month and a half ago.

Do I need treatment or any further testing?

(26 years old, blood work requested by a neurologist due to occasional dizziness and pain in my arms and hands, though the exam didn't show anything suspicious)

Thanks.

Nothing to worry about here.

Hi everyone!
I’ve been lurking here and reading through your posts for quite a while now, but since my headaches have started coming with vomiting, I finally decided to step up and ask for some advice...
I went to see my doctor, and naturally—given the symptoms—they immediately suspected either migraines or potentially a tumor, so now I'm starting the whole diagnostic process.
I just got my first set of blood work results back today, and I was wondering if there’s anything here that should actually worry me. For the most part, the blood count looks okay, but a few things are sitting outside the normal range:
(vK) SE - 3 (4 - 24)
Platelets - anisocytosis
(vK) Platelets - 128 (158 - 424)
(S) GGT - 7 (9-35)
(S) ALP - 46 (54 - 119)

I’m still waiting on the second round of lab results, but since everything is slowing down for the holidays, I won't be able to get those remaining tests done until after New Year's!

Thanks!

Melissa Ramirez70 said:Hey everyone!
I've been lurking here for a while now, and since my headaches have started bringing vomiting along for the ride, I figured it was time to actually jump in and ask for some advice...
I saw a doctor and, naturally, they're already throwing around theories about migraines or even tumors, so now I'm starting the whole testing marathon.
Got my first set of blood work back today, and I'm wondering if I should be panicking or not. My CBC isn't terrible, but these specific things are outside the normal range:
(vK) WBC - 3 (4 - 24)
Platelets - anisocytosis
(vK) Platelets - 128 (158 - 424)
(S) GGT - 7 (9-35)
(S) ALP - 46 (54 - 119)

Still waiting on the rest of the blood work, but since it's the holiday season, I won't be able to get any more tests done until after New Year's!

Thanks!

Come on, guys, please just type out all the blood results properly. Pretty sure you're missing some parameters here. What about white blood cells? Red blood cells?

So, wiredcanyon2:

(vK) SE - 3 (4-24)
(vk) Erythrocytes 4.35 (3.86-5.08)
(vK) Hemoglobin - 131 (119-157)
Hematocrit - 0.382 (0.356-0.470)
(k/Erc) MCHC - 343 (320-360)
(k/Erc) MCV - 87.8 (83.0-97.2)
(k/Erc) MCH - 30.1 (27.4-33.9)
(k/Erc) Reticulocytes - 10.0 (5.0-21.6)
(vK) Leukocytes - 6.3 (3.4-9.7)
RDW - 12.500 (9.000-15.000)
Eosinophils - 1.0 (0-7)
Segmented - 68.0 (44-72)
Lymphocytes - 28.0 (20-46)
Monocytes - 3.0 (2-12)

MORPHOLOGY
Platelets - anisocytosis
(vK) Platelets - 128 (158-424)

METABOLITES AND SUBSTRATES
(S) UREA - 4.4 (2.8-8.3)
(S) URINE ACID - 276 (134-337)
(S) T. BILIRUBIN - 12.1 (3.0-20.0)
(S) CREATININE - 91 (63-107)
(S) GLUCOSE - 4.90 (4.40-6.40)

ENZYMES
(S) AST - 13 (8-30)
(S) ALT - 14 (10-36)
(S) GGT - 7 (9-35)
(S) ALP - 46 (54-119)

ELECTROLYTES
Sodium - 141 (137-146)
Potassium - 4.2 (3.9-5.1)

TRACE ELEMENTS
(S) Fe - 19.2 (8.0-30.0)
(S) TIBC - 54.9 (49.0-75.0)
(S)(S) UIBC - 36.0 (26.0-59.0)

And that’s about everything. Thanks a bunch!

Melissa Ramirez70 said:Look, wiredcanyon2:

(vK) SE - 3 (4-24)
(vk) Erythrocytes 4.35 (3.86-5.08)
(vK) Hemog. - 131 (119-157)
Hematocrit - 0.382 (0.356-0.470)
(k/Erc) MCHC - 343 (320-360)
(k/Erc) MCV - 87.8 (83.0-97.2)
(k/Erc) MCH - 30.1 (27.4-33.9)
(k/Erc) Reticulocytes - 10.0 (5.0-21.6)
(vK) Leukocytes - 6.3 (3.4-9.7)
RDW - 12.500 (9.000-15.000)
Eosinophils - 1.0 (0-7)
Segmented - 68.0 (44-72)
Lymphocytes - 28.0 (20-46)
Monocytes - 3.0 (2-12)

MORPHOLOGY
Platelets - anisocytosis
(vK) Platelets - 128 (158-424)

METABOLITES AND SUBSTRATES
(S) UREA - 4.4 (2.8-8.3)
(S) URINE ACID - 276 (134-337)
(S) T. BILIRUBIN - 12.1 (3.0-20.0)
(S) CREATININE - 91 (63-107)
(S) GLUCOSE - 4.90 (4.40-6.40)

ENZYMES
(S) AST - 13 (8-30)
(S) ALT - 14 (10-36)
(S) GGT - 7 (9-35)
(S) ALP - 46 (54-119)

ELECTROLYTES
Sodium - 141 (137-146)
Potassium - 4.2 (3.9-5.1)

TRACE ELEMENTS
(S) Fe - 19.2 (8.0-30.0)
(S) TIBC - 54.9 (49.0-75.0)
(S)(S) UIBC - 36.0 (26.0-59.0)

And that's it. Thanks!

Aside from some very mild thrombocytopenia and platelets of varying sizes,
Everything looks pretty standard.

Urine culture results came back sterile

So there's no infection, yet the symptoms aren't going anywhere. I'm dealing with frequent urination (intense pressure that forces me to go immediately) and a slight stinging sensation in the urethra at the tip of the penis.....

analogorca33 said:I had a urine culture done—results came back sterile.

That means there’s no infection, yet the symptoms are very much real: frequent urination (there's this intense pressure right before I go, so I have to rush to the bathroom immediately), and this slight stinging sensation in the urethra at the tip of the penis.....

What about the urine sediment results?? Or could it be an STI??