Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Hi all, Do stents work or not? Are they permanent or is it a temporary fix for temporary relief?? Thank you, Eileen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 they work for a little while for some people and they are not permanent.....hope this helps Mark Question About Stents > Hi all, > > Do stents work or not? Are they permanent or is it a temporary fix for > temporary relief?? > > Thank you, > Eileen > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Hi Mark and thank you. Thi squestion may sound silly,but from what I have read, if they only are temporary and the placing of them can cause scarring, why is it done? Eileen > > they work for a little while for some people and they are not > permanent.....hope this helps Mark > Question About Stents > > > > Hi all, > > > > Do stents work or not? Are they permanent or is it a temporary fix for > > temporary relief?? > > > > Thank you, > > Eileen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Hi Eileen, Actually your question gets to the heart of the matter when it comes to stents. It is one of the more controversial treatment for non-malignant pancreas disease. Especially if it is done soley for pain control - that is, based on symptoms of the disease and no signs. If there is a clear indication of an obstruction seen on ERCP for example...like a tight constriction to the duct or a very gross dilation or a mass impinging on the duct or even a pseudocyst.... then stenting is not all that controversial. They will put it in for different time-frames. The improvement of the duct is then monitored. But when you suggest that the pain is coming from an obstruction to the flow of juice and there are no signs of that....then you get a very opposite extreme outlook. Some doctors are very adamant that you never stent in these cases, others say that it is worth at least one try. And both sides are right, that is, their opinions are based on very sound, scientific reasoning. The downfall comes in the way that pointed out....that is, when doctors treat each patient with pancreas / biliary pain in exactly the same way...not looking at the unique presentation and medical history. For some people, even messing with the pancreas once to try stenting may be very dangerous, for other people it may be a reasonable risk to take. I think, again just a humble opinion, that the best endoscopists / pancreatologists are those that are willing to put in the time to know their patients and are not ready to dismiss a procedure out of hand. I know that this sounds self-evident, that is, that ALL doctors should or do do this, but in my experience as a patient (and even as a health care worker) this is not so. It is relatively common, and easy, for doctors to see things in black and white, if / then scenarios.... and are not willing to taylor the treatment and diagnostics to the patient. I have to say, to me, thai is a characteristic that I most value in a doctor...even more so than his / her techniques or credentials I think. The one reason I got on so well with my good surgeon is that he understood my odd requests and why I made them. That is why I really disliked his PA - she was always telling me " well everyone else wants it this way " . Dr S realized that I do not go " blind " into an OR. That I need to see him before I go under to know (as I teased him) that it is really HIM in the mask and not some imposter or lacky. He understood too, that there was no way in heck I was going to go to a pre-op or post-op appointment with ANY doctor in the gyn field. So he always called for a surgical consult without my knowledge -which was our arrangement. I agree that most people wouldn't do that, I do not recommend anyone else doing it, but that is just me, and the way it will always be. Now he has the right to not comply....but if it doesn't cause any harm, then he is open to the idea. That is why I am VERY alarmed at the survey that I saw in a newspaper a few days ago....the one that said if a patient doesn't comply with recommended advice for medical care, the doctor " most likely " will drop the patient. In certain circumstances, I may agree with that statement....but in most I don't. Think about it....if a doctor says that the only way he will treat our pain is if we undergo surgery.....and we refuse....then he has the right to deny us any treatment at all? I know most people would say, go to another doctor....but it isn't always as easy as that (insuance coverage, distance, and even number of doctors in your rural area). We were always taught in school that if a patient doesn't wish to be treated in a 'standard " way, that you were still morally, legally and ethically obligated to see that he / she received care from you until the patient terminated that care. And if the physician terminates care because the patient's attitude really is unacceptable to the physician.....then he / she has to arrange for someone else to assume it. Now, I realize that this principle is no longer is practiced for the most part by physicians but I bring this up as an example of how far things have changed even in my short career (almost 25 years). Anyways, off on a blubbering tangent again. This is the first time in weeks that I have had the time and energy to wax philosophical on this board. Sorry that you are the recipient of my dancing keyboard! laurie Oh - stenting can also be used as a diagnostic tool...that is, if the pain goes away, then it can be assumed that an obstruction was the cause. And there are ways that doctors can reduce the chance of scarring. For instance, if you undergo multiple stents..it is recommended that each stent be a different length. So if the first stent is 5 cm long, the next one may be 7, the third 6. the fourth, 3 etc....It is thought that the scarring occurs at the tip, (the one furthest into the duct) so that by varying the length, the duct isn't exposed to as much inflammation, etc. Also, although changes are seen in stented ducts, most literature speculate that it may not be significant. It is thought that these are temporary changes for the most part and that within months (?) these abnormalities are gone. They are not sure yet how long term or injurious these changes are. From what i understand, there is a lot of research work going on too, to come up with a more friendlier stent. I heard of a group in Australia I think that is working on a stent that decomposes in the body after a while....kind of like the dissolving stitches (in prinicple). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2005 Report Share Posted October 7, 2005 Thanks to all of you for your very infomative replies! Are there particular doctors well known for being good at this? Eileen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.