Re: gallstones
- From: "Howard McCollister" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Sep 2006 16:17:05 -0500
"njuz" <anka.neretvanka@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eeupaa$80j$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
i kindly ask for the advice. Three weeks ago my friend ended in ER - acute
pancreatitis caused by gallstones. Pancreas was healed, and through
ultrasound 3 cholesterol gallstones (5mm) were detected. Doctors
suggested laparoscopic surgery in two months. He is 36 years old and
doesn't really fit into any gallstone risk group. Is the surgery really
necessary? Unfortunately, internet provides lots of contradictory
informations confusing us completely. It seems that risks after the
operation are more or less equal to risks if leaving the gallbladder in
the body. What would you suggest? How dangerous is to wait? What are the
chances of chronic pancreatitis in case of refusing a surgery? The problem
starts in liver - does the surgery deals with causes or only the
consequence? Can complete change of lifestyle (balanced diet without fats
and other nutritients that are causing problems to liver) ease the
situation.
Yes, gallbladder surgery is necessary for your friend. He is at risk for a
repeat episode of gallstone pancreatitis, which is dangerous, potentially
fatal.
Doing the gallbladder operation 2 months from now is old-fashioned, and
generally unwise. His gallbladder should have been removed right away, as
soon as his pancreatitis resolved.
The risk of complications from leaving the gallbladder and its gallstones in
VASTLY exceeds the risk of the gallbladder operation. Change of diet, change
of lifestyle will have no effect in reversing his problems.
HMc
.
- Prev by Date: New MRCP sites!
- Next by Date: pfizer leaked memo affirmative action hiring
- Previous by thread: New MRCP sites!
- Next by thread: pfizer leaked memo affirmative action hiring
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
