Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am a 15 year endometrial cancer survivor and my treatment involved the abdominal surgical approach because according to my gynecological oncologist the intent was to have intact removal of all my female organs and during surgery extensive exploration of my pelvic and abdominal cavity was needed to detect metastasis, biopsies needed to be taken of lymph nodes up to my aorta, and pelvic washings needed to be done to check for any free floating cancer cells. I was in the OR around 5 hours, stayed in the hospital 3 days, and after discharge to home my painful recovery took a good 3 months which was complicated by my incision spitting wide open following staple removal. As an R.N. having worked on a surgical unit early in my career I personally thought the removal was done too early which resulted in this complication, and very probably having them in a few more days would have prevented this from happening.
Within a couple of years following my surgery the Davinci robotic surgical approach replaced pretty much all abdominal surgical approaches to treat women like myself who had low stage endometrial cancer. My doctor told me had I been diagnosed a few years later he would have used this less invasive surgical method on me which he felt would have greatly reduced my recovery time and eliminated my incisional complication since the robotic approach produces very small incisions.
Initially I felt I got the bad end of the deal because my surgical approach was so invasive which along with my incisional complication created a lengthy and painful recovery. But as the years progressed I often wondered since although the stage of my cancer was very early the grade was on the higher invasive potential side, and had my uterus not been removed intact which is the case with robotic surgery IMO there was a higher potential for some of those cancer cells escaping into other parts of my body to set up shop and rear their ugly heads sometime in my future. I will never know the answer to this question, but especially now with all the data coming out like what is contained in these very important articles about negative outcomes from these less invasive surgical approaches, I have no regrets having the more invasive surgery because very likely I am alive today as a result.
Last edited by Nightengale212; 11-10-2018 at 03:55 AM..
Reason: add on
But as the years progressed I often wondered since although the stage of my cancer was very early the grade was on the higher invasive potential side, and had my uterus not been removed intact which is the case with robotic surgery IMO there was a higher potential for some of those cancer cells escaping into other parts of my body to set up shop and rear their ugly heads sometime in my future. I have no regrets having the more invasive surgery because very likely I am alive today as a result.
I agree....intact is the way to go.
Glad you made it
I was only 25 when a pap smear indicated possible cancer. Yes it ended up being cancer insito but in those days surgery was almost the only option. Thy GYN did say I could opt for radiation but it would make me unable to have kids. after having a premie that almost didn't make it and 2 that died within a few years I choose the hysterectomy. they left my ovaries. That was 55 years ago. I have never regretted the surgery We went on to adopt 2 babies and care for several foster kids, Now we have 3 grown kids, 5 grandkids, 5 great grandkids and some pretty cool adult foster kids we are still in contact with
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.