The scan itself isn't even that bad, honestly. The only truly "gross" part is having to get poked with a needle just to get that contrast dye injected so they can track everything on the RTG later. Other than that, there’s no pain—just the minor annoyance of having to shimmy around and flip from side to side on the table. The way you're using "gross" probably refers to all that prep work you have to do at home beforehand. It basically involves flushing out your system with gallons of water and those heavy-duty laxative powders, kind of like prepping for a colonoscopy. If you don't get things sufficiently cleared out, the RTG won't show anything useful, and then the whole thing was just a waste of time.
I honestly can't remember the last time I stumbled onto a post that felt this completely devoid of any point, so I'm sitting here wondering if you actually meant to hit send on this or if it was just some wild accident...
I honestly can't remember the last time I stumbled onto a post that made absolutely zero sense like this one does, and I'm sitting here wondering if you actually meant to write it this way or if it was just some weird fluke...
Yeah, you can definitely count on HBO being a solid method when dealing with ulcerative colitis. I don't have the exact stats on hand, but the positive impact is pretty undeniable. When you look at a whole range of illnesses and conditions—including those changes in the intestinal lining seen with Crohn's or UC—the main issue is that delivering blood, or rather the oxygen that the blood carries, gets hindered or just stops working right. Oxygen travels through the blood in two ways: by binding to hemoglobin, which handles over 90% of the load, and by dissolving directly into the blood, which accounts for a tiny fraction. By breathing pure O2 under pressure in a hyperbaric chamber, you can increase the amount of oxygen dissolved in the blood by about 15 to 20 times. This hyperoxygenated blood does a much better job of "delivering" oxygen to the periphery of the circulation—basically reaching those diseased tissues. It speeds up metabolic healing processes, wipes out anaerobic microorganisms, and shuts down harmful anaerobic processes. Tissue that’s been struggling because it lacked the basic "fuel" for life suddenly becomes much more vital, which really helps the body overcome the condition, illness, or injury. So, things like gas poisoning (especially carbon monoxide), atherosclerosis, Buerger's disease, peripheral diabetic complications, gangrene, nasty deep wounds with extensive tissue decay, gas gangrene, facial nerve palsy, or various types of vasculitis... all the way down to Crohn's and UC, actually have a clear indication for using HBO. As for contraindications, there are certain conditions in neurosurgery or neurology, malignant cancers, and pathologies within the middle ear or sinuses... maybe a few other things too. You really need to have healthy middle ears and sinuses. If that’s not the case, the HBO treatment has to be stopped because when the pressure rises, people can't equalize the pressure internally, which leads to intense headaches or ear pain. Besides private clinics, you can find HBO services at places like Mayo Clinic or major medical centers in cities like Los Angeles or Miami, and I believe in places like Houston where everything is covered by insurance so you don't have to pay out of pocket.
barokomora has its own set of pros and cons, you know? But first off, you didn't really mention what's actually bothering you... Was it that stuff about Crohn's you linked to, or something else entirely?
Honestly, just seeing a diagnosis on paper doesn't tell you much at all—I feel like it's written pretty vaguely, too. It’s kind of like if a doctor just wrote down "acute stomach pain" and called it a day. If they aren't being upfront about what's actually going on, you really have to get aggressive with the questions. You need to push them on what the root cause is, what the treatment plan looks like, and what kind of follow-up testing they're planning if they still can't pin down the cause... and so on.
First off, it’s a bit fuzzy which kind of metronidazole was actually being used—was it the pills, an IV drip, or those vaginal suppositories? Honestly, even if we knew for sure, I really wouldn't say that would be enough to cause any bleeding.
Honestly, based on everything you just laid out, I’d say just leave things exactly as they are right now—unless, of course, you're running into issues, but you mentioned you're doing alright. I mean, it’s worth keeping in mind that a month is still a pretty short window for a fracture to fully heal up and settle back to normal.
Any vascular surgeon around here can handle a femoral-popliteal bypass procedure without breaking a sweat; it’s definitely not some ultra-rare, high-stakes surgery that only specialists touch. That being said, let's be real—every single surgery carries its own set of risks, and those high blood pressure issues you mentioned certainly don't help things along. But honestly, as long as there's solid prep work done beforehand and they get the post-op blood thinner regimen dialed in perfectly, the outcome should be fine.
Rachel Brooks63 said:I figured one of you old-timers would eventually come around to revisit this classic thread...
man, Scott Allen10, seriously, no matter what kind of crazy job you've got, you really think that 😱is the absolute worst thing that can happen to a guy? 😁 😁 😁
hehehe...honestly, I’d love to tell you that isn't even close to the bottom of the barrel, but I guess I have to maintain some level of "manly dignity" for the sake of the guys out there... You know, kind of like this - 🙂...or even this - 🙂
Yeah, I get it, that whole debate was just a bit of a joke... but honestly, when you look at how things actually work, it’s always the same story—whether you go through the hassle of getting a swab or not, they always end up finding something. At the end of the day, man, you just pop some Sumamed or Ciprofloxacin or whatever else works and you're good to go... so... hmm... it really makes you wonder if there's even any point in messing around down there or jumping through all those hoops for some fancy diagnostic test if the treatment plan is basically identical every single time anyway.
@Angela Wright/">@@Angela Wright... oh man, my bad, please don't be mad at me! I just wanted to share a bit of what I've seen regarding urinary tract infections caused by staph a.
Honestly, finding out it's staph aureus doesn't change much for us when it comes to treatment protocols. In a hospital setting—even if we're seeing MRSA in a urine sample—we rarely jump straight to antibiotics for that. A UTI is way more of a headache when you're dealing with other bugs, like those stubborn, resistant strains of E. coli or Serratia.🙂
Angela Wright said:I didn't mean anything by it, I was just trying to explain my reasoning for posting that in the first place, you know? It didn't feel quite right to dump everything out there in one go right at the start, and honestly, I was just really curious to hear what you all experts think about the whole situation.🙂
Alright, sounds like a plan... everything's looking good on my end!
When it comes to hospital infections, let’s be real—they’re just part of the territory. It’s not even that our hospitals are doing a bad job, though I wouldn't call them exactly world-class either; it’s just that infections are an unavoidable reality in a clinical setting, especially when you're dealing with heavy-duty areas like abdominal surgery. Even places like Houston or New York City haven't managed to wipe them out entirely, so it's pretty unrealistic to expect us to have zero issues no matter how hard everyone tries. Every single infection is basically just looking for an opening in a body that’s already struggling due to some surgery or underlying illness. When you're dealing with hospital-acquired infections, I honestly think the most important thing is getting a solid assessment first—you really shouldn't be rushing to throw antibiotics at the problem, especially those heavy-duty broad-spectrum ones like Meropenem, Tazobactam, or Amikacin. If you start handing out antibiotics non-selectively to patients who are already vulnerable, you end up wiping out almost all their healthy bacterial flora, which just clears the path for things like MRSA, VRE, or fungi like Candida to take over since the meds won't touch them. And let me tell you, an MRSA infection or a case of candidemia can turn into sepsis so fast it'll make your head spin, moving straight into septic shock before you even realize what hit you. Thankfully, there is a way through it if you use Vancomycin or Linezolid for the MRSA, or Fluconazole and Cancidas for the fungi, provided you keep up with proper hydration, get their metabolic balance back on track, and stay on top of pain relief and fever management. Just wanted to jump in here and point out that there’s a massive difference between just talking about sepsis and dealing with septic or toxic shock. We're talking about a whole different level of emergency when it comes to shock—it's a critical situation where you really can't do anything short of having a top-tier ICU team on the case. So, basically... Sepsis is just one hell of a beast, man... honestly, it’s enough to make you lose sleep thinking about how quickly things can spiral out of control. You know, I was thinking about how people always lump septic shock and toxic shock together like they're the same thing, but honestly, they’re worlds apart when you really dig into it.
Honestly, if you aren't actually feeling miserable, I wouldn't bother swallowing anything at all. Aside from maybe making a conscious effort to stay hydrated and drink more water than usual, I personally wouldn't put a single thing in my system just for the sake of it.
I'm definitely not trying to start an argument with you here, honestly... I really do value what everyone has to say. My comment wasn't even meant as a direct jab at you, it was just my own little take on things based on what the original poster mentioned in their post.🙂
It’s honestly pretty tough to give any kind of definitive advice over the internet when things are this sensitive, you know? At the end of the day, you just have to trust that the doctors looking after him really have the best possible handle on his actual condition. I should also mention that with diagnoses like this, even if the surgeries and treatments were performed perfectly, there's always a real, lingering possibility that things might take a turn for the worse... it's just the reality of it. But, based on just a few things I’ve picked up from reading through everything: 1. I'm wondering why there isn't a nasogastric tube, or since he had a total gastrectomy, maybe a nasoduodenal tube? When you deal with abdominal surgeries where gut motility is often messed up and you're seeing vomiting or just general uncertainty in the abdomen, a nasogastric tube and some downtime are absolutely essential! 2. They really need to check the status of that esophagus-duodenum anastomosis. They should either run another pass with X-ray contrast or do an endoscopy using a fiberoptic scope to actually see if there are any dehiscences occurring. 3. Since he can't handle enteral nutrition—whether by mouth or via a tube—he definitely needs parenteral nutrition. We aren't talking about some basic 5% or 10% glucose solution here... we mean specialized parenteral formulas like Aminomix, Kabiven (from Fresenius), or Oliclinomel N550/1000 (from Baxter), paired with lipid emulsions like Intralipid or something similar... all carefully measured and tailored specifically to him. 3. That "neck catheter" you mentioned is most likely a central venous catheter placed in the internal jugular vein. Fifteen days isn't necessarily a breaking point for how long one can stay in, but in these kinds of uncertain situations, I'd personally pull the current one out and make sure a new one is placed somewhere else, like a subclavian catheter or a PICC line through the basilic vein. 4. If he isn't in the JIL and is instead staying on the abdominal surgery ward, I'd push hard for a solid hemodynamic assessment (checking CVP levels and systemic blood pressure) along with a metabolic checkup (arterial blood gas analysis + electrolytes, daily K, Na, glucose... etc.) and proper rehydration. In my experience, these kinds of toxic patients staying on general wards are almost always more or less dehydrated, which is never a good thing... 4. Some sort of urinary tract infection doesn't seem like the main priority given his current state. 5. It might not be the case, but... that description of sudden pain on the left side of his body always makes me think it's a good idea to check an EKG and cardiac enzymes (CK, CKMB, troponin) just to rule out a cardiac event like an infarct or unstable angina, or maybe even some kind of thromboembolism... considering how massive the surgery was, you really shouldn't overlook that possibility...
Looking at the ASA IV classification, it’s pretty clear that the biggest threat to this patient isn't actually the surgery itself, but rather the physical toll of undergoing anesthesia. It’s always tough to give a solid opinion when you're only seeing half the picture, but I’d say some form of regional anesthesia is definitely worth exploring here—besides a spinal block, which seems doable, a peripheral block might work, or even RIVA (regional intravenous anesthesia) could be a great way to go. That whole "it's either general anesthesia or nothing" argument feels a bit too black and white to me, though at the end of the day, the anesthesiologist is the one who really knows what they're dealing with, so maybe grab a second opinion from someone who specializes in vascular or cardiac cases just to be safe. Either way, the risk factor is undeniably high. What would be a smart move is to check in with the vascular surgeon planning the procedure... (I'm assuming it's a vascular specialist, please tell me it's not someone else)... to see if there's any chance of stenting that upper aneurysm instead. You know, some of those advanced imaging centers out there, when they pair up with a really skilled interventional radiologist, can pull off all sorts of "intravascular repairs" by threading endovascular stents through catheters, all while just using local numbing agents.
So, you've got a stone stuck in your ureter—though you didn't specify where exactly, like if it's up near the renal pelvis or something. Honestly, you probably need to get it dealt with because those things don't just vanish on their own. If you've already tried the whole "chug a gallon of water" approach and nothing happened, then going for ESWL is definitely a solid move. I’ve honestly never heard anyone link that procedure to diabetes; I can't for the life of me think of any way one would affect the other. At the end of the day, your urologist is the only one who can really give you the lowdown on your specific situation. Just a heads-up on what to expect: ESWL can sometimes trigger those intense kidney stone attacks. Basically, the shock waves shatter the stone into tiny little fragments, which then get flushed out through your urine. The most important thing is finding a real "sharpshooter"—an ESWL specialist who knows how to aim precisely at the stone itself rather than blasting the surrounding tissue. I mean, this is pretty routine stuff nowadays, but still... just make sure your "mechanic" hasn't had a few too many drinks before they start hammering away at your kidney!