Re: Question for the list! Help!

[Guest guest]

,

My understanding of some of the differences are:

1. The new stomach is a gastric tube of 3-4 oz. rather than the pouch of 1-2

oz. The tube is made up entirely of the non-elastic upper portion of the

stomach, (fundus). My understanding of the benefit is that we can eat a

somewhat greater quantity of food due to the pouch size and that our stomachs

are not inclined to stretch.

2. There is no silastic ring or otherwise surgically created small anastimosis.

My understanding is that SOME people with silastic rings or an otherwise

surgically created small anastimosis MAY have vomitting, stricture and/or other

complications.

3. There is only one puncturing of the small bowel, some 200 cm. (approx. 6

ft), from the duodenum, rather than two complete cuts of the bowel and the

creation of a " Y " . My understanding is that one cut is far less likely to

produce a leak than two complete severings. Also, the 6 feet of bypassed bowel

will never absorb calories again, enhancing our weight loss. The malabsorbtion

of nutrients has been addressed with our required lifetime increased vitamin

regime.

4. Because of the one puncturing, somewhat farther along the bowel, (many RNY's

only bypass 18 " ), there is not as much pulling of the intestines and associated

organs. Surgery is not as near the heart, liver or spleen. My understand is

that there is LESS likelihood of adhesions, internal bleeding and/or trauma to

other organs.

5. The MGB procedure entails transection of the new stomach and original

stomach. My understanding is that not all RNY surgeons DO transect the stomach.

Transecting is suppose to preclude staple line disruptions.

Dr. Rutledge has some very good illustrations at:

http://www.clos.net/ana_gitract01.htm

I hesitate to speak so strongly about this procedure vs. that procedure because

I usually get a mailbox full of flack from those who think the OPEN is the only

way to go and that LAP doctors cannot SEE what they are doing and somehow we are

shortchanged. My attitude, my experience is that the MGB is the ONLY procedure

for me and I am thrilled with my pre and post-op experience.

Sincerely,

na (hathfrtt@...)

272 on DOS 12/27/99

237 @ five weeks post-op

[Guest guest]

,

My understanding of some of the differences are:

1. The new stomach is a gastric tube of 3-4 oz. rather than the pouch of 1-2

oz. The tube is made up entirely of the non-elastic upper portion of the

stomach, (fundus). My understanding of the benefit is that we can eat a

somewhat greater quantity of food due to the pouch size and that our stomachs

are not inclined to stretch.

2. There is no silastic ring or otherwise surgically created small anastimosis.

My understanding is that SOME people with silastic rings or an otherwise

surgically created small anastimosis MAY have vomitting, stricture and/or other

complications.

3. There is only one puncturing of the small bowel, some 200 cm. (approx. 6

ft), from the duodenum, rather than two complete cuts of the bowel and the

creation of a " Y " . My understanding is that one cut is far less likely to

produce a leak than two complete severings. Also, the 6 feet of bypassed bowel

will never absorb calories again, enhancing our weight loss. The malabsorbtion

of nutrients has been addressed with our required lifetime increased vitamin

regime.

4. Because of the one puncturing, somewhat farther along the bowel, (many RNY's

only bypass 18 " ), there is not as much pulling of the intestines and associated

organs. Surgery is not as near the heart, liver or spleen. My understand is

that there is LESS likelihood of adhesions, internal bleeding and/or trauma to

other organs.

5. The MGB procedure entails transection of the new stomach and original

stomach. My understanding is that not all RNY surgeons DO transect the stomach.

Transecting is suppose to preclude staple line disruptions.

Dr. Rutledge has some very good illustrations at:

http://www.clos.net/ana_gitract01.htm

I hesitate to speak so strongly about this procedure vs. that procedure because

I usually get a mailbox full of flack from those who think the OPEN is the only

way to go and that LAP doctors cannot SEE what they are doing and somehow we are

shortchanged. My attitude, my experience is that the MGB is the ONLY procedure

for me and I am thrilled with my pre and post-op experience.

Sincerely,

na (hathfrtt@...)

272 on DOS 12/27/99

237 @ five weeks post-op

[Guest guest]

Lose slower! Tina if I weighed 181, I WOULD think I was thin!!! I heard a

lecturer who had lost a lot of weight once say, 250 is the most depressing

number on the way up, but after you cross 300, 250 is pretty sexy on the way

back down!! How true, how true!!! Congratulations on YOUR success.

[Guest guest]

Lose slower! Tina if I weighed 181, I WOULD think I was thin!!! I heard a

lecturer who had lost a lot of weight once say, 250 is the most depressing

number on the way up, but after you cross 300, 250 is pretty sexy on the way

back down!! How true, how true!!! Congratulations on YOUR success.

[Guest guest]

na...

Thanks so much for that layman's explanation of the differences of the RYN vs

MGB as you understand it. While I knew most of that, I found it hard to put

into words.

Jane

[Guest guest]

na,

Very well put! Your comparisons were great!

Thanks!

Tina

234 8/2/99

181

I lose slower than most so don't be discouraged by my 53 lbs!

[Guest guest]

Thanks na!

[Guest guest]

Thanks na!