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

bluegull18 said:Could someone please explain this coagulation panel to me:
1. Prothrombin Time (PT) 11 (reference interval 10-15 s)
1.13 (reference interval 0.70-1.30 ratio)
0.94 (reference interval 0.90-1.20 INR)

2. Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) 23 * (reference interval 25 - 33 s)
3. Fibrinogen 4.0 (ref. interval 2.1 - 4.0 g/l)
4. Thrombin Time 16 * (reference interval 17 - 21 s)

NOTE: PT INR is used to monitor oral anticoagulant therapy.
The recommended therapeutic value is 2.00 - 3.50.

The patient was referred for these tests because a capillary burst in the eye occurred spontaneously (no heavy lifting, physical exertion, sneezing, or coughing triggered it; there was no pain, but blood spread across the entire white of the eye). High blood pressure has been ruled out. The individual has been on oral contraceptives for years and takes thyroid hormone replacement for hypothyroidism.
Do these two values that fall below "normal" suggest any specific potential issues?
Thanks.

Dear bluegull18,

These results from the hemostasis system testing are quite interesting and can be difficult to interpret unless one specializes in this field (to be clear, I am not a hematologist and don't specialize in clotting disorders, so this response represents only my own thoughts and modest understanding of the subject matter).

First off, the deviations in aPTT and TT are quite minor.

Interestingly, clinical attention is usually focused on prolonged aPTT and TT—values that exceed the upper limit.

A shortened aPTT (as seen in the report above) is rarely the primary focus.

It is understood that a shortened aPTT can sometimes be part of an "acute phase response" (essentially the blood reacting to inflammation or injury). In such cases, it is typically transient; once the factor causing the acute phase reaction resolves, the aPTT values normalize. Additionally, poor sample collection is often cited as a possible cause for such findings.

What makes these results particularly interesting, and why I mentioned them as such, is that a shortened aPTT doesn't logically align with bleeding symptoms. If spontaneous bleeding occurs, one would generally expect aPTT values to be above the upper limit (prolonged aPTT) or, at the very least, within the normal range.

However, since there are clotting disorders where patients present with normal baseline results, and given that this individual has only undergone a few tests with values that deviate only slightly (albeit in an unexpected direction), I believe nothing definitive can be concluded here. It’s impossible to both confirm and rule out a hemostasis disorder based solely on this. This likely means further investigation will follow, guided by the clinical picture and a hematologist's assessment.

Best regards. 🙂

Sam Hall69 said:Hello!
I’m thinking about getting on birth control, so I went to have my coagulation profile checked. It turns out my PV is 0.65 L (normal should be >0.7).
PV-INR at 1.33 L. Note says target range is 2.0–3.5.
Can anyone make sense of this?😕

Dear gentlepilot28,

The PV values show a slight deviation. Essentially, the PV measurement—which represents the percentage of activity relative to normal plasma—is somewhat low at 0.65, or 65%. Since the standard range sits between 0.7 and 1.3, this indicates a slightly prolonged PV.

Since PV refers to how blood clots, your results suggest yours might be clotting just a bit slower than average. It’s worth noting, though, that this is only a marginal decrease.

The real question here is whether this specific value holds any clinical significance for you—meaning, what comes next and if more testing is actually necessary. Honestly, it’s impossible to give a straight answer without a full physical exam, a deep dive into your medical history, and a look at your other lab results.

Consult with your doctors.

Greetings. 🙂

Sam Hall69 said:I would really appreciate some clarification on these hormone levels. This is part of a follow-up for long-term PCOS. After being on Diane for a long time, I switched over to Yaz about two months ago. During my last ultrasound, both ovaries still looked polycystic. These are my recent results from day five or six of my period.

I'm also managing Hashimoto's. The prescribed dose is 88 mcg of Synthroid, but I've been sticking to 75 mcg. I'm 22.

Cortisol 623 nmol/L.
TSH 0.99 mIU/L. Within the normal range. Everything looks steady here.
LH 3.78 IU/L.
FSH 3.3 IU/L.
Testosterone at 1.1 nmol/L. That's essentially running on empty. It’s like trying to drive a car with no fuel in the tank—you might turn the key, but you aren't going anywhere.
Estradiol L
Prolactin 236 mIU/L.
DHEA-S 3.9 micromol/L
Androstenedione 6.6 nmol/l.
SHBG >240 nmol/L.

Is it just me, or is this FSH/LH ratio actually showing progress? Back when I was on Diana, my LH was consistently three to four times higher than my FSH. It feels like things are finally shifting. 🙂
Given that I'm currently taking Yaz and Synthroid 50, can the other irregularities in my results—like this SHBG level, for example—be interpreted in light of those medications?

Thanks a lot!

Dear Sam Hall69,

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head regarding how stabilizing the LH and FSH ratio—specifically seeing that rise in SHBG after starting hormone therapy—serves as a clear indicator that the treatment is actually working.

In this particular scenario, an increase in SHBG is actually desirable and expected.

As for the rest of the results, they look steady—basically right in line with your current treatment plan.

Still, that’s just my take. Since I’m no gynecologist, you really need to have the final word come from your own doctor. Definitely run these results by them before making any moves.

Greetings. 🙂

Maria Fisher46 said:Hi bluegull18,

These results from your coagulation tests are actually pretty interesting, though they’re a bit tricky to parse unless you live and breathe this stuff—just to be clear, I’m not a hematologist and I don't specialize in clotting disorders, so please take this as just my own personal take based on what I know.

First off, looking at the numbers, the deviations in the APTV and TV are actually quite minor.

It’s funny because people usually fixate on a prolonged APTV or TV—basically, anything that comes in higher than the upper limit.

Very little attention ever gets paid to a shortened APTV, like what we’re seeing here.

Usually, a short APTV is brushed off as part of an acute phase response—which is basically just the blood reacting to inflammation or an injury—and it's typically temporary; once whatever triggered that response clears up, the APTV values normalize. There's also always the possibility that the blood draw itself wasn't handled perfectly, which can sometimes skew things.

The reason I called these results "interesting" earlier is that, logically speaking, a shortened APTV doesn't really line up with bleeding symptoms. If someone were experiencing spontaneous bleeding, you’d generally expect to see an extended APTV (values above the limit) or, at the very least, values within the normal range.

But, since there are certain clotting disorders where patients still show totally normal baseline results, and considering this person has only had a handful of tests out of a much larger set—with values that are only slightly off, albeit in an unexpected direction—I honestly think you can't draw any real conclusions from this alone. You can't confirm or rule out a disorder based strictly on this; it likely means more follow-up is needed to match the clinical picture with a hematologist's assessment.

Best, 🙂

Thanks so much for the reply. 🙂

Hi there.
I just had my bloodwork done for Borrelia burgdorferi, and here are the results:
Borrelia burgdorferi IgG antibodies: POSITIVE
Borrelia burgdorferi IgM antibodies: NEGATIVE

My doctor is out on vacation, so I was wondering if anyone could help me figure out if I currently have Borrelia or if this is just from a past infection.
Thanks!

mistymaker8 said:Hey there.
I just got my bloodwork back for Borrelia burgdorferi, and here’s what I’m looking at:
Borrelia burgdorferi IgG antibodies: POSITIVE
Borrelia burgdorferi IgM antibodies: NEGATIVE

My doctor is out on vacation, so I was hoping someone could tell me if I actually have Borrelia or if I just had it in the past.
Thanks!

It's totally possible you were exposed. Those specific IgG antibodies for B. burgdorferi show up gradually, usually after the IgM levels start to dip. Plus, IgG can stay high for a long time even after you've cleared the infection. When it comes to a Lyme diagnosis, the lab work isn't everything—you really have to look at the actual symptoms and rule out other stuff. Serology alone can be pretty hit or miss; you get those "cross-reactivity" issues where the test flags Borrelia just because you've dealt with something like EBV or CMV instead. Bottom line: you need to weigh these results against how you're actually feeling and whether you've been around ticks lately. Cheers.

Mom just got her results back today:
Histology type: basal cell carcinoma
Location: skin on the dorsal region of the nose and cheek
And there's a mention of about 5mm following that (depth, I guess?)

These results are from the tissue sample removed from the left side of her face, right from the bridge of the nose down under the eye.
They basically just shoved the report into her hands this morning and told her that since she's a nurse, they couldn't comment on it—so she should try to catch a doctor tomorrow...
Maybe there just wasn't any doctor available at the Mayo Clinic at that moment 😠, and my mom is just that kind of person; she took it all so calmly, having them hand over a result like that and send her home without a single word of explanation...

Mom doesn't want me to worry (we don't live in the same house), so she successfully hid the fact that the results arrived until tonight (we've waited even longer for other samples before...)

I've looked up quite a bit online regarding this specific type of carcinoma.
What I'm wondering is if anyone knows what this part means under location, because it feels like it might indicate whether it has spread or not (I'm a layman, so maybe it means something else, who knows).

The state of our healthcare system is such that by the time we wait for a doctor's interpretation, tomorrow afternoon will have already passed, and I am honestly on the verge of a nervous breakdown right now... 😢
And I have to go to work tomorrow morning and absolutely cannot miss it...

Thanks in advance for helping me make sense of these results.

Carol Roberts18 said:My mother received her results today:
Histological type: Basal cell carcinoma
Location: skin of the nasal bridge area, left side
And there is a mention of about 5mm further down (depth, I assume?)

These results are from the tissue sample removed from the left side of her face—right at the root of the nose, just below the eye.
They basically just handed her the report this morning and told her that since they are nurses, they aren't allowed to comment on it—so she should try to catch one of the doctors tomorrow...
I suppose no doctors were available at the Mayo Clinic at that specific moment😠, and my mother is just the type of person who accepts things quietly—she took being handed such news and sent home without a single word of explanation just completely in stride...

Mom doesn't want me to worry (we don't live under the same roof), so she successfully hid the fact that the results had arrived until this evening—even though we’ve waited much longer for other samples in the past...

I've found quite a lot of information online regarding this specific type of carcinoma.
What I am curious about is if anyone knows what is meant by the "location" section—it feels to me like that might imply whether it has spread or not (I'm a layman, after all; perhaps it means something else entirely).

What is the state of our healthcare system lately? By the time we actually get a doctor's interpretation, tomorrow afternoon will have already passed, and I am already on the verge of a nervous breakdown... 😢
And I have to be at work tomorrow morning—there is absolutely no way I can miss it...

Thanks in advance for any help in interpreting these results.

The information listed under location refers to exactly that—it's the Latin term for the site, specifically the skin on the left side of the bridge of the nose.

As for the 5mm, you really ought to transcribe everything from the report; that measurement could refer to the size of the lesion, the depth, or even just the size of the histological specimen itself... so it's impossible to comment on without seeing the full report. It is also vital to know if there are clear margins in the histological preparation—meaning, was the lesion removed in its entirety?

Basal cell carcinoma itself is actually the most benign form of skin cancer—essentially, it doesn't metastasize, but rather remains locally aggressive (spreading into nearby structures). It might potentially reappear in the same spot, requiring another removal, but your mom likely won't need any follow-up therapy beyond regular check-ups.👍

I'm jumping on board with what was said above. Honestly, I feel bad that you're stressing out and finding out about this diagnosis in such a rough way. If it helps at all, this kind of situation can actually be considered a "good" outcome because once they get in there and perform the surgery, that tumor doesn't usually come back—or if it does, it rarely pops up in the exact same spot—and it won't spread to distant parts of your body. Hang in there.

Can someone please make sense of this for me? My spinal loading is all messed up. On the RT part of my spine, they found spondylarthrotic changes, some mild CIII lumbar issues, deformative spondylosis, plus uncar osteoarthritis in the intervertebral joints, and some pretty noticeable osteoarthritic stuff too. The vertebral bodies and spine have diffusely low mineral content—basically, amidst all these changes, the disc space at C-II-III and III/IV is slightly narrowed. Also got shoulder contractures, paresthesia in my right L5-S1, cervical and lumbar issues, and some mild degenerative changes in the DIP and PIP finger joints (Rheumatoid Arthritis).

slyskipper10 said:Can someone please explain what my spinal load looks like? In the lumbar part of the spine, spondyloarthritic changes were noted, mild CIII lumbar spondylosis, deformating spondylosis, as well as uncaratosis of the intervertebral joints, along with some pronounced osteoarthritic changes. The vertebral bodies and the spine show diffusely reduced mineral content, and amidst these significant changes, the intervertebral disc space at C-II-III and III/IV is quite slightly narrowed. Shoulder contractures. Paresthesia in L5S1 on the right, cervical symptoms, lumbar symptoms, from C2 down to S1, slight degenerative changes in the DIP and PIP finger joints (Rheumatoid Arthritis).

What a lovely little read... personally, I'd be more interested in knowing which functional problems in daily life these Latin medical terms actually cause, and which specific activities are now off-limits.

Maybe I didn't ask this right, but listen—I've got this pain in my upper neck area, and then my head starts throbbing and feeling this intense pressure right at the base of my skull. It’s like this sharp, electric shock sensation shooting down from the pressure straight into my shoulder. And it doesn't stop there! For months now, my back has been killing me, both in the middle part of my rear and all the way up toward my chest. Not to mention the pains in my lower disc area and my joints too. It’s getting so bad I’m waking up in the middle of the night. Honestly, the worst part is when I sit still for even just 30 minutes; the pain just ramps up like crazy. What’s really freaking me out is that nothing makes it go away. I have this constant, weird feeling like someone is literally steaming me from the inside out. Does anyone know what this could be? Thanks.

slyskipper10 said:Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly. I have pain in my upper neck area, which causes headaches and pressure at the base of my skull. This pressure then travels down toward my shoulder like an electric shock. For months now, I've had pain through the middle of my back, both in the front near my chest and in the rear. Not to mention the pain in my lower disc area and my joints, which wakes me up at night. What bothers me most is that when I sit for even 30 minutes, the pain intensifies. I'm just worried because this isn't going away; it feels like I'm being burned from the inside. What could this be? Thanks.

It is entirely possible that your daily habits—specifically how you sit, stand, and walk—are the root cause. If you aren't using your spine as a structural pillar and instead find yourself "hanging" on your soft tissues, you are essentially forcing your musculoskeletal system into constant strain. It is perfectly logical that pain would develop over time, and irregularities in the cervical spine frequently manifest as numbness in the arms.

The fact that you are waking up during the night suggests you are struggling to find a position that allows for actual relaxation. It is important to realize that you can become conscious of these habitual movements and postures. By consciously altering how you move, you can begin the process of guiding your body back into balance.
I hope this clarifies the situation, though I am well aware that these issues are highly individual and require a personalized approach.👍

Kimberly Ward said:Aha, but I feel like you could have handled most of that at an infectious disease clinic, a local hospital, or somewhere else entirely. I just think it’s something different right now.

I don't get you, Brandon Newman95. What did you mean by saying it's something else right now? Could you please explain?

I am 25 years old, and here is my recent X-ray report covering my spine, pelvis, and hips:

The lumbar spine shows rotational dextroscoliosis in two directions along with an increased lordosis.
The lumbar vertebrae exhibit normal shape and mineralization. There is also S1 lumbalization accompanied by a microdisc.
There is no significant narrowing or bridging of the intervertebral spaces, though there is a tendency toward narrowing in the upper lumbar intervertebral spaces.

The pelvic and hip X-ray reveals mild arthritic changes on the left side with periacetabular sclerosis, though the joint space remains unconstricted. On the right, there is evidence of pre-arthrosis. Bone mineralization appears normal. Barsony?

The report concludes with that question, which I assume was intended for an orthopedist.

Essentially, I sought this evaluation because I have been acutely aware of a certain asymmetry for quite some time. While it isn't visually obvious unless one scrutinizes shoulder levels and other markers I’ve researched regarding scoliosis—such as waist discrepancies or uneven rib cage protrusion—I feel it deeply, particularly on a functional level. I am incredibly inflexible, and my lower back aches from time to time. I was active in sports through the end of high school, followed by a much more sedentary lifestyle consisting of sitting through college and graduate studies; what a joy. Every doctor I have consulted simply pointed to my supposedly "good" posture and activity levels, offering nothing more than a suggestion for orthopedic insoles.

If anyone could provide some clarity regarding these findings, I would be most grateful. Furthermore, I am seeking recommendations for a reputable orthopedist in New York City or the surrounding area, as well as any contraindications regarding specific sports or exercises. I am a demanding patient, but a thankful one.
Thank you very much!

Hey there! Can someone help me make sense of these results?! Here's what it says...

TRANSCRANIAL DOPPLER

TCD vertebrobasilar flow
RVA 37 LVA 47 BA 43 cm/s. - looks normal

TCD Circle of Willis
MCA dex. 40 SY 41 ACA 47 PCA 32
MCA sin. 69 SY 37 ACA 43 PCA 40 cm/s

Flow asymmetry over the MCA, RIGHT SIDE LOWER THAN NORMAL. Everything else looks fine.
If anyone knows what this actually means—like, is it dangerous or what?—please let me know.
THANKS SO MUCH!

I just went in for HPV typing and the results came back positive for high-risk type 16. My doctor recommended I boost my immune system with supplements and vaginal treatments, plus stay on top of regular checkups. One of the doctors actually told me that even using condoms isn't enough protection against transmitting this virus... So, I'm wondering, is it okay for me to have sex? And if I do use a condom, is there still a chance I could pass the virus onto someone else?
Thanks in advance 🙂

I've been dealing with elevated eosinophils for about four months now. They were at 26%, and now they've climbed to 29%.
The parasite screening came back negative.
It’s not like I have allergies or anything.
When I went back for more blood work, everything else seemed to be within the normal range, except for a few things:
NEU 30.0
MCV 81.3
(K) HB 118
Hematocrit 0.350
Medical Report

In what kind of situations would eosinophils be this high—like 29%—and what am I actually looking at here?
Any help would be appreciated...

Kimberly Edwards2 said:My eosinophils have been high for 4 months now. They were at 26%, and now they've hit 29%.
The parasite screening came back negative.
I don't have any allergies.
When I went back for a follow-up blood count, everything was within range except for
NEU 30.0
MCV 81.3
(K) HB 118
Medical Report
Bilirubin 26

In what kind of situations would eosinophils be this high—like 29%—and what am I actually looking at here?
Help me out...

You can't just drop lab results and expect an answer. How old are you? Any actual symptoms? Why did you even get the blood work done in the first place? And what's your LDH looking like?
There are way too many possibilities.

Kimberly Edwards2 said:For four months now, my eosinophils have been elevated. They were at 26%, and now they've hit 29%.
Parasitology tests came back negative.
I don't have any allergies.
On my latest blood work, everything was within range except for
NEU 30.0
MCV 81.3
(K) HB 118
HCT 0.350
Bilirubin 26

In what scenarios would eosinophils be this high—around 29%—and what could be happening here?
Please help...

Hello,

If memory serves, you posted a similar inquiry with comparable lab values on this sub-forum back in April 2011.

I wrote something then, and I can summarize it again here. There are several major categories that cause eosinophilia: parasitic infections (specifically tissue parasites, which aren't caught by stool samples but require serological blood tests), allergies, autoimmune disorders, or malignant conditions.

Therefore, your diagnostic path should follow this direction: 1. A full infectious disease workup (this must include serology for tissue parasites, not just stool analysis); 2. An evaluation by an internist specializing in immunology or allergy (simply ruling out asthma isn't enough). Once a thorough investigation is complete and the cause of the eosinophilia remains unidentified, the next step is seeing an internist who specializes in hematology.

Naturally, if specialists at secondary care facilities (like a general hospital) haven't reached a conclusion, I’d recommend consulting those same specialists (infectious disease experts, immunologists, hematologists, etc.) at a tertiary facility (such as a major university medical center or a large clinical hospital).

Best regards and all the best to you. 🙂

Nicholas Myers☕ - thanks again. 🙂

My primary care doctor mentioned seeing elevated eosinophils, sometimes over 50%, and told me it’s nothing to worry about.
Since I've never even heard of—let alone noticed—elevated eosinophils on a blood test during my regular checkups, this spike has me pretty anxious, regardless of what my doctor says. Especially since I don't actually feel sick or have any symptoms at all.
I've been given a referral for an internal medicine specialist.