CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Kevin Garcia12 › Posts

Posts by Kevin Garcia12

148 posts shown.

@electricangler32/">@@electricangler32
If you brought me lab results like those, I’d personally just hand you an antibiotic right then and there... Why? Because you've got leukocytes and bacteria sitting in your urine sediment—which isn't a smoking gun on its own—but you also have a positive leukocyte esterase result in your urinalysis, which is basically that part showing the white blood cells... And given that you actually have symptoms, honestly, I wouldn't even bother ordering a urine culture unless empirical therapy fails or some other complication pops up, because frankly, it's just not worth the hassle. A single pack of Ciprofloxacin or something similar, which usually clears up uncomplicated cystitis in about four or five days, is way cheaper for the healthcare system than running cultures and subculturing samples, especially since that process takes several days here anyway... So, in my book, you should just get the antibiotic started while the inflammation is symptomatic and wait for the results to catch up... 🤷
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
Linda Johnson66 said:Hey, how do doctors actually know if I’m ready for surgery just by looking at blood work, chest X-rays, and urine tests? I’m going in for a cyst removal on my ovary, but what happens if I have some issue with my large or small intestine that I don't even know about—like, something undiagnosed or just some general illness I'm totally unaware of???

In reality, nothing is ever absolute in this field...
The whole idea behind running these tests is to get a sort of "snapshot" of what's happening inside your body right now, much like when you go in for a standard physical, and it also serves to "document" your baseline health status before surgery in case anything goes sideways later on—though whether that's actually useful is a bit debatable...

On the other hand, there's been a growing movement lately in the medical community toward a more liberal approach, where they don't bother with a laundry list of tests if the patient doesn't have any existing comorbidities; instead, if issues *do* exist, they aim for much more "targeted" testing, mostly to cut down on costs and, secondarily, to avoid bothering the patient unnecessarily... Regardless, old habits die hard, and frankly, it's a nasty habit to break, but as an anesthesiologist, I feel I have every right to demand whatever tests I deem necessary before I take responsibility for someone's life...

Personally, I try to stick as closely as possible to risk assessment protocols (the ASA classification), and after performing a physical exam, I usually decide exactly what I want the patient to have tested. This can range from absolutely nothing (for instance, a child needing a minor procedure or a healthy young adult without underlying conditions) all the way up to an echocardiogram or a CT scan of the abdomen if we're dealing with someone who has cardiac issues or a massive tumor—and obviously, if those haven't already been done by the surgeon, because no sane person is going to order a repeat CT without a damn good reason if one was performed just a month ago...

Jamie Ross7 said:This is such a great topic; my hat's off to the experts here who take the time to answer our questions...
...I'm going to throw out a variation of a question that's been asked before, because honestly, I am absolutely miserable with how much nausea and vomiting hits me every time I wake up from general anesthesia...

...can this be something that develops over the years?...

It certainly can....

Jamie Ross7 said:Does it have anything to do with the dosage, the ratio of fat to muscle tissue, or maybe an issue with the liver?

We don't know for sure... I mean, we can look at statistics to see who has a higher probability of being hit by nausea, but nobody can tell you with 100% certainty the exact mechanism of why it happens to one person and not to another...
🤷

Jamie Ross7 said:either it's those opioid components in the cocktail—if I wrote that right—because I’m usually the type who reacts aggressively to them; once, because of a massive headache from my sinuses, I was given Tramadol and immediately felt nauseous.

It could be—but it’s definitely part of it... Opioids absolutely ramp up nausea, just like N2O and a whole bunch of other stuff usually (I say usually, not always), though the anti-nausea meds they give you generally work pretty well, at least in the short term...

Jamie Ross7 said:I mean, I don't really have experience with whether it can happen without that blood pressure spike, but honestly, I’d just settle for being a puke machine.
I'm trying to figure out what changed and if there's anything I can actually fix myself, potentially.
(I really hope this doesn't mess with me again.)

It's tough, unless you loudly emphasize during every single surgery that you suffer from REPETITIVE postoperative nausea and vomiting, so that whoever is handling the anesthesia "beefs up" the preventative measures... otherwise, I don't see what else you could do, like how you're supposed to "desensitize" yourself to PONV with something you do on your own...🙂

Linda Johnson66 said:Hi, I have a laparoscopy for a clear ovarian cyst coming up in ten days, but I caught a cold this week—it's been going on for about 4 days now. I've got a cough, I'm hoarse, and my nose is stuffed up every morning, though I don't have a fever. Does this mean they'll probably postpone the surgery??

Look, the answer is way more complicated than it might seem, or honestly, it should be according to any kind of logic... So let's start with the head...
The reason why anesthesiologists hate it when patients have a cold is the exact same reason they hate heavy smokers—airway irritation. An irritated airway is far more prone to reacting to extra stimuli by spasming the vocal cords and bronchi, triggering coughing fits, or producing excessive mucus that then clogs up the airways, whether those are natural or artificial...
The problem is that in anesthesia, we mess around with the airway quite a bit, especially when we're inserting tubes (which is standard for laparoscopy), and furthermore, after a "cold," excessive irritation and airway reactivity can linger for up to two months after the other symptoms vanish... even if someone is functioning perfectly fine on a daily basis, they can still react to being "poked," so whether you had a fever during the cold or not has absolutely NOTHING to do with it and isn't a predictor of how reactive the airway will be at a given moment following an infection, which brings us to the next point...
Complications... First things first, here’s the intraoperative data... Bronchospasm... just one of those things that hits you like a freight train when you least expect it, leaving you gasping for air while everything else seems to just grind to a halt... It’s such a relentless, suffocating sensation, isn't it? One minute you're fine, and the next, it feels like someone's tightened a vice around your chest, making every single breath feel like a desperate struggle against an invisible weight... It’s honestly exhausting, both physically and mentally, trying to fight through that tightness while your lungs feel like they've completely shut down on you... You know, there are certain things that can go absolutely sideways right on the operating table, and it’s enough to completely ruin the day for both the anesthesiologist and the patient, no matter how well everything else goes... And honestly, even with some surgeries, just a simple, violent coughing fit can turn into a total disaster—like if you’re having a hernia repair and a massive cough causes everything to just snap from the sheer strain. Then you've got laryngospasm kicking in right after they pull the tube out, which is terrifying... Plus, we have to face the reality that once you've gone under general anesthesia, your body's natural ability to clear out secretions from your airways is going to be compromised for a few days. Even if we don't give you extra meds that mess with things, the inhaled anesthetic gases themselves actually interfere with the function of the cilia on the bronchial and tracheal cells... and that can lead to real symptoms or even full-blown pneumonia because general anesthesia frequently causes those tiny parts of the lungs to collapse—what we call atelectasis—which temporarily, or sometimes permanently, tanks your lung capacity and leaves you struggling...
Discussion... Look, obviously there are all sorts of anesthetic techniques out there—some higher risk, some lower—that can be used to get the job done depending on the circumstances, and if you make the right call from the start, you can seriously cut down how often things go sideways or how bad those complications actually get... every single anesthesiologist knows this, and honestly, they usually have several different ways to tackle the exact same problem, but before anything else happens, there is always one fundamental question that has to be asked first... Why on earth would anyone even bother exposing themselves to an increased risk of complications if it isn't absolutely necessary... I mean, seriously, what is the point of taking that gamble when you don't have to... And that goes both ways—it’s just as true for the anesthesiologist as it is for the patient, because at the end of the day, we're talking about the patient's actual life and their long-term health... so really, the whole debate over whether you should go under the knife while fighting a cold or not is just one big, complicated question that doesn't have such a simple answer...How much does it actually matter if you get the procedure done right this second? I mean, really... how critical is that timing when everything feels like it's hanging in the balance..."
Look, there’s a massive difference between facing a malignant tumor that’s actively threatening to spread and grow—or if you're dealing with a procedure that you've been stuck waiting months, or even years, for—or maybe someone who actually risked their entire career by using up their single annual vacation just to get surgery because their private employer won't let them take medical leave... that's one thing entirely... but if we're talking about something that can be pushed back a month without anyone breaking a sweat, then we are talking about something else altogether...
Look, at the end of the day, it really just boils down to the agreement between the patient and the anesthesiologist, and honestly, everyone is entitled to their own perspective on this kind of thing... you can't just force an opinion on someone because they're the one ultimately carrying the weight of the decision, and they have every right to turn down a treatment if they aren't feeling it—unless, of course, we're talking about those absolute emergency situations where the patient's condition is crashing and the doctor feels like things could be stabilized through therapy or just waiting it out instead of jumping straight to a procedure...
My personal take on this... Look, as I made clear before, I can't exactly speak for my colleagues who are actually running the anesthesia on the day of the procedure... they have every right to use their own clinical judgment and set their own criteria based on what they see in front of them, and honestly, that’s just how it works in an American hospital... Personally, I rarely ever pull a patient from the schedule unless we're dealing with an "active" cold involving heavy coughing and specific lung sounds—which usually points toward tracheobronchitis—but even then, I always make sure to walk the patient through the potential complications... If I truly feel the risk is unacceptable, I might even demand an extra signature acknowledging they understand the risks before we proceed with anesthesia, though obviously, if it's an emergency or if postponing the surgery would be a massive logistical nightmare, I'll just lean heavily on proper premedication to minimize any issues and carry out the anesthesia with every necessary precaution in place... 🤷

Look, you absolutely have to make sure you tell the anesthesiologist who’s handling your case about that cold, no matter what... because if it happened just a day or two before the surgery—which, let's be honest, is usually how these things go—and they don't take the initiative to swing by and check on you in the afternoon before the actual procedure, you really ought to mention it to the nurse... just suggest that someone from the anesthesia team comes by to give you a quick look and maybe adjust your premedication so it actually works the way it should...
Taylor Hayes6 said:So now I’m seeing they found internal hemorrhoids during his colonoscopy, and gastritis on the gastroscopy. Anything that wasn't malignant was considered a "normal" finding back then, but this could actually explain where the anemia is coming from, right?

It definitely could...

Chris Howard3 said:I went to see my doctor because I have this intense sore throat—I don't even have tonsils, just a fever hitting 100.4°F for three days now. My lungs feel like they're burning and I've got this dull ache under my right rib cage, plus swollen lymph nodes...
now I just called her and she said my white blood cell count is fine, but my SE is 32, ALT 78, and AST 61. I assume everything else is okay since she didn't mention anything else. She also mentioned she's running more liver tests because she doesn't think it's smart for me to take antibiotics right now, and told me to check in Monday. I'd love some input here... my liver enzymes have been elevated several times over the last five months.

Just wait until you talk to her on Monday, honestly. When it comes to liver enzymes, there are a million things that can spike them, so it's really risky to try and guess without having the full picture... everything from specific foods to various medications, or even infections and toxins can "bump" the liver, especially if the elevations aren't massive, and these numbers aren't exactly huge... 🤷
It’s not going to be pernicious anemia, because this was microcytic anemia—pernicious is MACROCITIC, for crying out loud. Besides, you could feed someone iron until tomorrow and it won't do a damn thing if you don't address the B12 deficiency, but since the levels are actually climbing here, just forget about that theory... it's clearly iron-deficiency anemia. It takes time for both the red blood cells to recover and for those iron stores in the blood to actually refill. As for those "normal" test results—keep digging, seriously. If nothing else pops up once the iron replenishment is finished, get a fecal occult blood test done to see if there's any hidden bleeding that isn't visible to the naked eye...
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
Neurosurgery combined with awake anesthesia is a pretty niche field, and I won't get bogged down in the technical weeds right now because it wouldn't make much sense to anyone else—it’s done more for specific clinical necessities rather than just keeping a patient conscious for the sake of it. Even within "awake" procedures, there are different variations where a patient might be asleep during certain phases and awake during others, so it’s not always constant wakefulness, though when we say "awake," we mean the patient doesn't lose consciousness entirely...

Regarding local or regional anesthesia and general procedures—yes, you can perform most standard operations using one of those methods, provided you keep in mind that they carry their own set of risks and potential complications. To give you a straight answer, I’d need to know exactly what procedure we're talking about, but aside from massive, complex surgeries involving the chest, major blood vessels, the heart, or deep abdominal work, you can almost always find a way to manage if the patient stays conscious...

In my opinion, whenever it's feasible, the patient really ought to be fully informed about their anesthesia options and any possible complications; they have a fundamental right to participate in deciding how the procedure is handled through consultation with both the surgeon and the anesthesiologist. An operator's or anesthesiologist's personal comfort isn't a valid reason to force a specific type of anesthesia on someone, but then again, if I, as a surgeon or an anesthesiologist, don't feel comfortable performing a procedure under certain conditions, that's also my right and I can refuse to proceed...
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
Honestly, they really ought to swap out that ENT specialist because he clearly doesn't have a clue when it comes to peri-operative management; if he did, he’d realize we’re constantly pulling people off the surgical schedule due to respiratory issues and other infections—including ear infections—on a daily basis, especially when dealing with elective procedures...

Since I don't know the exact diagnosis, the specific reason for the surgery, or any of the gritty details regarding this particular ear infection, I can't really judge why my colleague made that call, but personally, I’d probably just clear you for surgery without making a scene, no matter what's going on in that ear, provided you sign a specific waiver acknowledging that proceeding with an untreated condition could lead to complications ranging from severe disability to death...
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
Look, having any kind of infection lingering in your system when you're heading into surgery is never a good thing. It’s not just about the intubation—that’s a minor headache compared to the other complications waiting in the wings. At the end of the day, it all comes down to the clinical assessment... weighing whether the necessity of the procedure actually outweighs the massive risks involved...
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
neontinker5 said:So far, I've been under general anesthesia three times, plus a few rounds of local; twice back when I was a kid and once right at the start of high school. This coming Tuesday, I’ve got a surgical consult for some moles—one is about 8mm and showing some suspicious changes. It's in a pretty tricky spot right above my heart, and since I'm on the skinnier side with just bone underneath, what kind of anesthesia are they actually going to use? If they decide on general, does the fact that I've already been under three times change anything... like, does it increase my risk for complications?...

The likely call is local anesthesia, though they might consider general if that growth is stuck to the bone and they practically have to "grill" the area... having been under anesthesia a few times before doesn't inherently spike your risk for problems. There is always a tiny possibility of developing a sensitivity to one of the drugs used, but unless you have other allergies, it's almost negligible. Honestly, having had several successful procedures without any issues is actually a good sign to the anesthesiologist; it suggests there aren't any glaring red flags hanging over your head like there might be when someone is stepping onto the table for the very first time...
Looking for a specialist... in Health ·
Stupidity isn't just something we should fix; it’s something we absolutely HAVE to deal with, one way or another, because this kind of negligence can turn life-threatening faster than you can blink—if it hasn't already (I mean, think about it: an infected prosthesis leads straight to osteomyelitis, then sepsis, plus eighty grams of weight loss and you're basically dead)... You need to get some sort of imaging done immediately, like a fistulogram, to pinpoint exactly where that fluid is coming from. If it’s some kind of seroma under the skin, they need to go in and resect it to clear things up, and if the root cause is an infection from the implant or even an allergic reaction to the material itself, then that prosthesis has to come out so the infection can be treated, or they'll need to swap it for a different one made from entirely different materials...

The only time you could even remotely tolerate seeing something like this is right after surgery when the wound is still incredibly active and healing, so maybe you wait a bit to see if it "just closes up" on its own, but even then, that should be resolved within a few days at the very most. Otherwise, my honest advice is simple: find a new specialist to handle your care...
I can't believe I'm even typing this out, but honestly, if anyone else starts asking me the same mindless questions about my labs, I might actually lose it... I've already explained the whole situation with my aspartate-aminotransferase and alanine-aminotransferase levels more times than I care to count, and frankly, I'm tired of feeling like I have to defend my medical history to a bunch of strangers on the internet... It’s not like you guys are specialists or anything, so maybe just sit tight and let me vent for a second... Asks:
...Should I be genuinely worried about this, or is there a chance this could just pass as a perfectly normal set of results?...

At any rate, they’re looking good enough to go under the knife...

Angela Nelson3 Asks:
I’m looking for some insight here, or at least a decent explanation of these results... I really need to know what we're looking at and what could be going on. An immunologist actually referred me after they started suspecting some kind of autoimmune disorder...

If all those values are sitting squarely within the reference ranges, then obviously these tests didn't pick up a thing, which is frustrating as hell... To get a real, honest-to-God assessment of what's actually going on, you're really going to need to sit down with an immunologist, but if I'm being blunt, it looks like we're still going to have to dig much deeper to find the actual cause of everything you've been dealing with...
It’s a tough call, really, because it all depends on just how intense someone's triglyceride and cholesterol utilization actually is... normally, a 24-hour window gives you a pretty solid snapshot of what's going on, but when you're dealing with certain enzyme function issues—whether that's something you were born with or something you picked up along the way—even the most hardcore, disciplined diet plans can fail to "chase" those numbers back down into the normal range. In any case, everyone knows that your diet is basically the boss of your triglyceride levels, but for everything else in that lipid panel, you're looking at a tug-of-war between what you eat and how your liver produces stuff... basically, if you're genetically predisposed to high cholesterol, you could stop eating every single gram of fat on the planet and your levels would still stay high because your liver is just going to synthesize it anyway...

As for the AST and ALT, honestly, practically anything can push those upward, and they are such incredibly non-specific markers when it comes to signaling that something is actually happening with the liver from a metabolic and cellular standpoint...
What do you guys think of my little hatchback? in Miscellaneous ·
Look, man, just get real for a second. If you aren't just trolling and actually intend to commit to a project like this, you surely realize you won't be tackling any serious off-road trails in a car like that... and there is absolutely no point in wasting money upgrading those pathetic brakes for that kind of terrain because you won't even survive your first attempt at driving it through the dirt...

My honest advice? Maybe pick up a hobby you actually understand, because fixing a commuter car is worlds apart from building a legit race machine. If you had even a shred of clue, you’d know you don't start this journey with a used Chevy Spark, even if it's the only thing sitting in your driveway right now. It would be way more logical to just sell it for scrap at a local junkyard and use that cash to buy something that can actually handle being modified for the mountains, rather than trying to turn that little thing into some eyesore that looks like it's trying—and failing—to be an off-roader...
Casey Cooper49 said:...was taking L-Carnitine, had blood drawn this morning and these are the values that came back elevated:

aspartate-aminotransferase - 37
alanine-aminotransferase - 68

Look, these are only slightly elevated, so it’s honestly tough to pinpoint why because liver enzymes can be pretty "reactive" when you're messing with various supplements—like Carnitine, for instance. I don't know the exact degree of their impact, they could definitely be causing it, but realistically, anyone dealing with this on a daily basis would have a better handle on it... it's possible it's due to that, but it doesn't have to be...

Casey Cooper49 said:Cholesterol - 6.9
LDL cholesterol - 4.6....
all my other values are within the normal range, even though I'm feeling a bit under the weather with a cold and some allergic rhinitis that has me using Avamys spray....

Your cholesterol and LDL are high, quite high actually, and while the AHA/ACC has lowered the "alarm threshold" a few times over the years, this is definitely outside the guidelines no matter how you look at it...

wiredsailor46 said:Can someone help me interpret these blood results? My doctor is on vacation and I really don't have the patience to wait until they get back:
WBC 4.9
LYM% 25.4
MON% 5.5
GRA % 69.1
LYM# 1.20
MON# 0.20
GRA# 3.50
RBC 4.43
HGB 136
HCT 0.386
MCV 87
MCH 30.7
MCHC 352
RDW 13.3
PLT 233
MPV 6.6
PCT 0.153
PDW 14.8

I had the tests done because of some hives that keep breaking out....

There is nothing to interpret here; these results don't say a single thing that would shed light on the cause of your hives, and frankly, since there's no differentiation of granulocytes into Eo/Ba/Ne to help identify an existing allergic tendency, it's twice as useless for that purpose...
Amy Torres6 said:The sample is the baby's umbilical cord blood. What exactly is acidemia, and what does it imply in this specific case occurring during a C-section? What was the trigger for the acidemia? Was it hypoxia?
The baby has Grade II brain bleeding (left side) and hypertonus dystonia syndrome. He’s almost 3 months old now.
Thanks for the reply

Basically, if we're looking at hypoxia being the culprit, then acidemia—or acidosis—essentially means the blood pH has shifted toward the
"acidic" side (lower than physiological norms). Granted, preemies and even full-term babies have their own little quirks, and a generally healthy newborn can handle quite a bit when it comes to oxygen levels and electrolytes, plus their "normal" blood work looks a bit different than ours adults, but I'm pretty damn sure we're talking about a pathological value here...
Since this isn't my primary field of expertise, if you want a 100% airtight interpretation, you really ought to talk to a neonatologist, but based on everything described, it's logical to assume hypoxia was involved... because the meconium, that low pH paired with a heavily negative Base Excess, and those CTG changes are all classic hallmarks of fetal distress, which acts as a prognostic sign for complications and potential damage. In any case, opting for a C-section was definitely the right call, though whether they should have jumped into surgery sooner or avoided attempting a vaginal delivery altogether (assuming it wasn't an unplanned emergency) is something I won't weigh in on, since I'm not an OBGYN...
Hypoxia was clearly present even before the surgery started, and that’s what caused the meconium-stained amniotic fluid and those CTG shifts that triggered the decision to go in for the section in the first place...
Amy Torres6 said:So, I'm looking at my discharge papers from the hospital after giving birth, and there's this note written on them...
So, the labor ended up being induced because the CTG looked pretty sketchy and pre-pathological... then everything just went south and we had to finish things via C-section since progress completely stalled out. To top it all off, the amniotic fluid was meconium-stained... So, looking at my latest labs... the blood gas results just came back and they aren't exactly what I was hoping to see. My pH is sitting at 7.266, and the base excess is down at -12.9... which definitely feels like things are a bit out of whack on the metabolic side...
I was wondering... what exactly is that bolded part supposed to mean?...
Thanks for getting back to me...

It’s most likely an ABS analysis from the baby's umbilical cord blood, which would probably point toward moderate acidemia in this situation, but since there isn't any specific info on where exactly that sample was pulled from, we're really just left with speculation... 🤷

TheChloee's said:I'm not entirely sure where else to dump this, so I really hope you guys don't mind me popping in here... Anyway, a buddy of mine just got his PET/CT results back and he's telling me this:
There’s absolutely no sign of abnormal glucose metabolism in the retroperitoneal lymphadenopathy area that would clearly point to any malignant activity... and I don't see any pathological metabolism in the other lymph node basins either, nor in the spleen or the bone marrow...
Since there's no sign of significant lymphadenopathy, we really need to dig deeper and evaluate those nodes further... It’s possible we could be looking at a low-grade lymphoma, especially since the PET scan didn't show any metabolic glucose activity elsewhere in the body that would point toward an active malignancy...
So, looking at this conclusion, he’s got swollen lymph nodes all over his body, and the report actually specifies the size and shows them in the images; now, keep in mind his grandmother had leukemia, and then last year he suddenly came down with a pulmonary embolism and that's when everything just started spiraling downhill... only for the doctors at the local county hospital to insist for two whole months that nothing was wrong, eventually sending him home with nothing but some Advil and Tylenol, while meanwhile the thrombosis took hold of his leg and now he's stuck on crutches... they ended up having to go out and get their own testing done because, obviously, he clearly wasn't getting any real help...

So, what's the actual question here...?
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
Look, like my colleague was saying, the whole point isn't really about the blood type or the blood itself, it's more about the fact that when you're sending samples over for a transfusion during a T&S procedure or if there's some kind of interaction happening, they run a routine blood group check anyway, regardless of whether they already have those records on file from before...

As for Petrov, I honestly don't see any reason why he’d need to be from there, nor is there any actual advantage to that at all...

Regarding the "clearance" for surgery—I mean, hospitals do recognize those clearances from outside facilities to varying degrees, but most of the time, local anesthesiologists are still going to insist on doing their own assessment and actually talking to the patient, and frankly, most of those outside clearances don't even include specific "premedication" orders because every single hospital system has its own preferred drugs and dosages...
Sure enough
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
When people talk about "low molecular weight heparin," they're usually referring to taking Fragmin 5000 between 5000 and 7500 units once a day, or maybe splitting up 2500 units into two doses... or even using things like Clexane, Fraxiparin, or Arixtra at the appropriate dosages. If you look at the medical literature over here in the States, it's pretty common to manage this with Warfarin too, but that just isn't how we typically do things around here...
Anesthesia, Resuscitation, and ICU: Q&A in Health ·
amberpilot8 said:The surgery was postponed the first time because they didn't have any anesthesia supplies at all, and then when they called me back the second time, they claimed they had just a little bit left, so a few of us patients who had some kind of "connection" managed to squeeze in. But honestly, what they actually had and the quality of it... let's just say it wasn't exactly top-tier American standards.

It’s strange to think they wouldn't have anything unless we're talking about some tiny private clinic that doesn't usually handle general procedures, which would mean they had to scramble to organize everything, and if that's the case, it might explain why things went sideways... if the selection of meds was incredibly limited, even the best anesthesiologist is going to find themselves in a tight spot regarding how long the drugs last and all that...

amberpilot8 said:I get that we laypeople can't really dive into such deep technical territory, but when it comes to calculating risk, we really need to know certain basic factors to decide whether to go through with something like this or not... unfortunately, right now we're only learning through trial and error because there's a lack of time and dedicated patient care, so we have to go looking for information online ourselves.

Dedication is dictated by external circumstances—the sheer number of people waiting in line, or the fact that someone has another job on the side; otherwise, you might be surprised to learn that most people don't even want to know too much about these things, so those who actually do want to know need to ask directly to get straight answers, and obviously, you shouldn't wait until two minutes before they start the pre-op exam to have that conversation...

amberpilot8 said:I've had both negative and positive experiences with doctors, including situations where I basically had to save my own organs through sheer intuition. The hardest part is handing your life over to someone else when you know absolutely nothing about the disease or the treatment itself.

I know, it's especially hard for people when it comes to anesthesia where you lose consciousness and control, but that's just how it is; once you lie down on that table, you're putting your life in my hands, and it all boils down to whether you trust that I know what I'm doing and that I'll do everything humanly possible to ensure you wake up without complications...

Most of the time we succeed, sometimes we don't...

amberpilot8 said:And honestly, I had no clue anesthesia was such a massive headache until now, but I definitely get the gravity of it all...

Thanks for laying everything out so clearly for me.

Don't mention it...

crimsongull20 said:In that scenario, is there any chance an anesthesiologist could just tell the patient after the pre-op exam, "Look, because of your specific diagnoses and the nature of this surgery, we really need drugs X, Y, and Z, which the hospital doesn't carry. Would you like to buy them and bring them in before the procedure?"

No way. Even with standard hospital medications, the whole concept of "bringing your own supplies" is a logistical nightmare in the US medical system, so in a situation where everything being used is either administered strictly by the doctor or is on a controlled substance schedule, it’s basically impossible... plus, when you get into anesthetic gases, you have to deal with manufacturer-specific formulations and all that technical stuff...

The only real move is to hope the hospital is well-stocked and try to schedule things for the middle part of the month—not right at the beginning when everyone is scrambling—because that's usually when they actually have "everything" they're supposed to have...
You’re right on the edge of anemia, but honestly, those levels shouldn't really be causing any actual symptoms unless you've had some kind of sudden drop—like from heavy periods or an injury—but you could always get your TIBC/UIBC checked to see what's actually happening with your iron stores, even if everything mentioned above doesn't look like typical iron-deficiency anemia... basically, it's acceptable...