Sorry to bring it up but...colonoscopies (hubby, benefit, best)
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 just had my regular colonoscopy about 10 days ago - my fourth. There are 2 kinds of "anesthesia". "Twilight sleep" through IV drugs and "general anesthesia". General anesthesia seems like overkill to me in most cases - including mine. So I have always had "twilight sleep". I am not sure I could tolerate the pain/discomfort of the procedure without anesthesia - and don't want to find out. This last time - the drugs I had were fentanyl and midazolam. I had a bit of discomfort for about the first 5 seconds - and then "conked out" until I woke up in the recovery room.
My previous gastroenterologist (who retired before my last colonoscopy) told me that one advantage of the "general anesthesia" is that you're awake and alert for the rest of the day after you've had it. Don't know if that's true. With the "twilight sleep" - my experience is that you wake up. And then you're "good to go" for about an hour (just enough time to have something to eat ). Then you get very sleepy and wind up sleeping for about 2-3 hours. So - if you have your colonoscopy in the morning (which I recommend) - you're pretty much out of it for part of the afternoon.
As for the discussion about whether to have a colonoscopy - my mother never had one. She was diagnosed with advanced non-treatable colon cancer at about age 80. And the last 3 years of her life were absolutely dreadful. She died when the cancer ate through her colon and she "bled out". It's a death I wouldn't wish on a dog. And it's pretty awful watching it play out too. Note that my first colonoscopy - at age 50 - was "clean". Ditto with the one at age 60. The one I had at age 65 (time reduced to 5 years because of my mother's cancer) was far from clean. I had numerous polyps - including a couple that were pre-cancerous. All were removed. This most recent one - at age 68 (because of the results of my last procedure) - I only had a few polyps. None pre-cancerous. So I'm back on a 5 year schedule now. The way I look at it - if my mother had had colonoscopy as recommended - she wouldn't have died a super ugly death from colon cancer. Might have easily lived another 5-10 years. Robyn
P.S. When it comes to things like Cologuard - I'm skeptical. But have never had to consider it - since I'm not a candidate for it.
I have had 4. The first one was done with local anesthetic. The doctor was running late (personal stuff not another patient) and by the time he got around to my procedure I could feel everything. It was horrible.
The next time I changed doctors and was knocked out each time. I remember nothing - and that's the way it should be.
The prep work is inconvenient but not as bad as your imagination might make it seem.
When I was informed what one goes through with the prep work beforehand, I all but screamed: No Way In Hell will I subject myself to that kind of torture!!
No liquids for X amount of hours, and with my dry mouth as a result of the medication I'm taken?
Please! Give me an earlier death rather than go through all that!!!
It all seems so incredibly primitive, and in this day and age of high tech, I'll wait for some high tech procedure to come along!
The limitation on liquids is none for 2 hours before the procedure. That isn't a big deal in my book. Pretty much what you have to do for morning "fasting" blood tests. For me - the problem isn't too little when it comes to liquids. But too much (all that Golytely). BTW - I find that a diet of lemon jello and clear chicken broth the day before keeps me feeling pleasantly full.
When it comes to "high tech" - well it would be nice if there was something out there that was easy and inexpensive. And didn't require a bowel prep (which most people find is the most objectionable part of the procedure). Note that some alternatives that are out there today - like the "pill cam" and CT scans - still require a bowel prep.
Also - there is no high tech way to remove polyps and similar. You have to get in there and cut them out. So - if someone is considering an alternative - it's only a 100% solution if your results are negative. If your results aren't negative - you're going to need a colonoscopy. Overall - colonoscopy is your only "one stop shopping" option regardless of your test results.
Finally - I think that anyone with your attitude should take some time to read about what dying from cancer - especially colon cancer - is like. You don't wind up dying peacefully in your sleep:
In my mother's case - when the cancer perforated her colon - right before she died - she basically bled out. There was blood everywhere. Even with my brother the doctor and a hospice nurse there to help us - it was very traumatic seeing that. And no one who sees something like that will ever be reluctant to get a colonoscopy. Robyn
I don't know what the big deal about the prep is. Have you never taken a laxative and had diarrhea? So you have a little diarrhea for one night, not a big deal at all. I've done it twice, once for a sigmoidoscopy and once for colonoscopy. The stuff they use now was super easy. You start at 2pm the day before the procedure, and you only have to drink about 14 ozs of this stuff two times. You can drink clear liquids only from that time until 2 hours before the procedure. I was in and out of the hospital in a little over two hours with my lovely colon photos in hand. I felt just fine and we went to Chile's for a burger minutes after we left the hospital. I felt great and went about my day. I had some intravenous drug, assume it was propofol, and I don't remember a thing, woke up feeling great and no significant farting.
As for the discussion about whether to have a colonoscopy - my mother never had one. She was diagnosed with advanced non-treatable colon cancer at about age 80.
Also there's this: colon cancer is considered to be one of the most "roaming" malignancies in that it's highly metastatic. My mother's malignant colorectal polyps technically didn't kill her, but lung cancer did a few years later. My sister-in-law died from agonizing bone cancer a few years after her malignant polyps were removed. We'll never know for sure that either's cancer metastasized from the colon but statistics suggests it was probable.
The purpose of routine colonoscopies is to detect and remove the polyps BEFORE they become malignant. I for one am grateful that my benign polyps were detected and removed.
To me, the small inconvenience of a test every 5 years or so is minor in contrast to the horrible possibility of colon cancer and potential metastases. It's no different to me than the discomfort of annual mammograms and gyn exams. They're not pleasant but it beats the possible alternative.
My DH has had polyps removed in the past and so they said his most recent scope was diagnostic and they charged him $500 upfront. A couple months later our insurance unexpectedly refunded it. We were pleasantly surprised .
When I was informed what one goes through with the prep work beforehand, I all but screamed: No Way In Hell will I subject myself to that kind of torture!!
No liquids for X amount of hours, and with my dry mouth as a result of the medication I'm taken?
Please! Give me an earlier death rather than go through all that!!!
It all seems so incredibly primitive, and in this day and age of high tech, I'll wait for some high tech procedure to come along!
A good friend and fellow R.N. that I work with buried her 30 year old son last year from terminal colon cancer. Very high incidence of colon cancer on his father's side of the family which included his father, as well as an aunt, uncle, and one grandparent. It was recommended that he have a colonoscopy in his early 20s but he put it off. How he was diagnosed was the developed abdominal pain and surgeons thought he had acute appendicitis and during surgery he was found to have late stage colon cancer. After multiple surgeries which included a colostomy and rounds and rounds of chemo he passed away of a horrific death 3 years later. Had he had an early colonoscopy, and the recommended for him one every 2 years he would be likely be here today.
Believe me, as others here have mentioned you do not want to die a horrible death from colon cancer if there is any possible way to avoid it!!!
My brother had one without drugs, I think it was not that painful. For me I was too chicken, so I had drug and it went over quick. Painless.
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.
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.
). Then you get very sleepy and wind up sleeping for about 2-3 hours. So - if you have your colonoscopy in the morning (which I recommend) - you're pretty much out of it for part of the afternoon.
