Is gallbladder removal the right choice?
Posted , 7 users are following.
Hello to everyone!
Having gallstones in your gallbladder implies that you have low concentration of bile, which is produced by the liver. The role of the bile is preventing the formation of gallstones, thus breaking down the amount of bad cholesterol in our body. So, if someone removes the gallbladder, he or she may suffer from even lower bile concentration (higher cholesterol in our body), thus is the removal of gallbladder the right choice or the best choice will be to seek for efficient ways to increase our bile concentration?
0 likes, 6 replies
sarah87162 Albenc8
Posted
I had my gallbladder removed a few years ago as I had gallstones.
My cholesterol level is still absolutely fine.
Maybe I have just been lucky
Sarah
joanna17875 Albenc8
Posted
I thought the role of bile is to break down fat, like the washing up liquid of the digestive system!!
Never heard of the cholesterol being higher because of gb removal, the gallbladder is a sac attached to the liver, bile is produced in the liver and stored in the gallbladder.
Sgt.lindalee Albenc8
Posted
Hello Albenc8, There are 3 ways the medical community explains gallstone production(basically)oversaturation of cholesterol(too much for bile to handle), bile that is ineffective in breaking down cholesterol(due to a defective enzyme), blockage of the components of bile to come together to do their job (bile has several components in its makeup)...each of these SOURCES of stone creation can have separate CAUSES, too much cholesterol intake/obesity, sludge(a known precursor to stones, medications/estrogen/supplements, &etc... Not all stones are made up of cholesterol, there are 3 basic types, makeup can consist of proteins, bilirubin, red blood cells, calcium, cholesterol, etc..First, you would need to have an idea of what type of stones they are, to determine what the cause could have been. Second, surgery/or not, you still need treatment for your existing stones, it may be possible for them to be broken up, passed, or left there. Increasing bile concentration now may prevent future gallstones, if THAT were the cause but, probably not the ones already there. Third, it would be helpful to look toward preventative measures. Truly, the person you should talk to is your Dr. he/she is the ONLY one who can try to get answers by running tests, doing diagnostics & etc..ask THEIR opinion about surgical vs. non-surgical options(any other questions you have) If you aren't satisfied, get a second opinion!!Best Wishes to you, hopefully you get the answers you deserve(they should ALL be answered b4 you have surgery) it is YOUR body & your decision, surgery always has risks, you should feel confident in ANY decision you make!!☮❤🍀
Micklemus Sgt.lindalee
Posted
I found your writings very interesting and one 'item' is that you do not advocate out of hand is the joining of the cue to have the gall bladder removed as so many have done and also doctors are mostly very happy to remove a gall bladder that has even cholesterol stones in it. I noted that you said that dissolution of cholesterol stones please correct me if I misinterpreted that will not be dissolved by the chemical treatment? It is a fact that cholesterol stones of type will be dissolved by ursodeoxycholic acid treatment....... That is if the doctor knows of that method of getting rid of cholesterol stones that have formed in the gall bladder.
A mature gastro registrar told me that she had never heard of the ursodeoxycholic acid treatment to dissolve cholesterol gall stones and to reinforce her lack of medical
knowledge she emphatically stated that removal of the gall bladder is the only way to get rid of gall stones that have formed. She also wrongly stated that once they are in there "removal is the only option". I wrote to her superior who reversed what she said and he wrote me a prescription for Urso which he confirmed " will dissolve gall stones". I do still have a none symptomatic gall bladder which may have a single 10mm stone in it but is not carrying the five other stones that were in situ 3+ years ago.
I think this proves beyond doubt that others would benefit if they did what I did and not believe and put their trust in not one but several so called specialists but research this complex problem before letting them remove the gall bladder. There are also many scare mongers who say that urso Has amy problems re damage but I would ask why then is urso given to help patients with liver cirrhosis? i.e. lessening the damage that has taken place?
I see there are many post operative problems witten about on this forum which must be a fraction of what is found world wide in those who have had the gall bladder removed!
Another anomaly is the fact that some patients who have no chance or very risky re an operation do have gall stones removed by procedure re local anesthetic.
fernando90225 Micklemus
Posted
ok then you still have a large gallstone. so that method didn't work. oh and by the way did this doctor tell you that they will form again. They will and you will be back in the same boat. Having it taken out will prevent this from happening again.
fernando90225 Albenc8
Posted
the role of bile is to break down fats during digestion. it's is not preventing stones from forming. if you have no gallbladder that doesn't mean you have more cholesterol. you are wrong.