I have been reading up a bit on it and personally I would never have it. Unless you have a surgeon who is extremely skilled at doing it, there are significant risks from the procedure that I'm not prepared to take.
Can I ask, if ablation is only used when there will be no further pregnancies, and given that it may not solve the issues and is reasonably major to perform, wouldn't hysterectomy be just as an effective option? Given that I also read that 10% of women having had ablation go on to have a hysterectomy as well.
Ausgirl - ablation is a MUCH less invasive procedure than hysterectomy. There is no cutting involved and you can be back at work within 2 days. There is also none of the other after-effects that you get with hysterectomy such as the hormonal issues. I would not consider having a hysterectomy just to get rid of AF, but this procedure was quick, easy and relitavely painless.
Ausgirl, the uterus performs far more functions for the female body than just as a bag to carry a baby. Having a hysterectomy is never a good idea and most are performed unnecessarily. Watch this video and see if you still think that hysterectomy is an alternative. http://www.hersfoundation.org/anatomy/index.html
That's a very interesting clip Trillian. There are alot of things in there that I've never heard before for sure.
My mother had one and it certainly was deemed necessary at the time, though this was 25 years ago now, so who knows? She lost one of her ovaries at the time due to a rough surgeon (mum said he was grumpy in the theatre prior to the op).
However a friend with uterine cancer had one which was necessary, if she wanted to save her life. And another friend just this week had one which she deemed necessary for her mental (let alone physical) health. So while yes, it certainly has been the 'easy out' for many gynaes in the past (and probably present) I disagree that it's never an option.
I agree though that women should have far more information before choosing it as a solution to their issues.
Well of course it's different if it comes down to a life or death or even severe mental health issue, but for about 90% of women, it's just not necessary as a means of treating run-of-the-mill gynae problems. The long term physical effects after having one are far too big a risk to make it worth it.
Ablation is a far less invasive procedure than hysterectomy which is MAJOR surgery. Ausgirl, can you explain the connection between your friend's mental health and her uterus? I fully understand the burden of living with excessive periods (btdt) but it's a pretty big leap from there to hysterectomy, especially when there are a number of options in the middle ground that can work just as effectively?
My AFs were at the point that I didn't want to leave the house for the 1st 2 days each cycle as my flow was so heavy (I'd soak thru a maternity pad in the time it took me to drop DS at school!) followed by 2-3 days of lots of clots which left me very tired. For me the few risks of an ablation were definitely worth it if there is a chance my AFs will slow down or even stop, but I wouldn't go on and have the hysterectomy just for this reason. It's sometimes easy to say "that's too risky and I'd never do it", but sometimes it is worth the risk if there is a chance you can function normally again
Yep I agree with you Dee, you need to weigh the risks up against the potential benefits. I've had periods that heavy too, but luckily only for a few months, I just don't think I could cope if it was happening longer term. But if I was going down that path I would have a detailed discussion with the gynae about which method and why, how many they had done, what problems had other women had. There is an enormous difference between what a good surgeon can do compared to an ordinary one.
And yes I agree it's really important for women to ask a whole lot of questions when it comes to our reproductive health, western medicine does not have a good track record for respecting the sophistication of our body parts.
Well I can't really answer for her as it's her head space not mine. But things she has explained - never knowing whether you're going to make it through a day without flooding everywhere (especially while at work), not being able to travel on mission trips in less than sanitary countries, due to not being able to safely manage or know when to expect af, being totally exhausted and run down from constant bleeding, having no sex life and therefore stress on marriage due to constant bleeding, and not to mention pain.
Oh and she also had a very bad prolapse.
I don't know whether she chose this over other options or if other options were actually on the table, kind of not my place to ask those things.
Registered User
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks