Question:
long term side effects of both
I am trying to make up my mind between these two procedures. I have heard that distal provides faster weight loss, but that there are more problems with things like diareha, gas and food intolerance. I am concerned that these side effects would interfer with my work since I have a very public position. I would like to hear from people that have either procedure and to have them share with me what problems and benefits they have experienced. I want to make a well informed decision since this is a life long commitment. — Barbara L. (posted on September 25, 1999)
September 25, 1999
Hi, Barbara--I had a distal (open) RNY 3 months ago and have had no
diarrhea, very limited gas, and I truly am able to eat most anything, just
in very small amounts. Today, I ordered nachos at a Chili's restaurant and
I ate the cheese and refried beans off the top, had a couple of bites of
diced tomatoes, and two taco chips. So far, I haven't thrown up. Hope this
helps. I wish you the very best--
— charlene M.
September 25, 1999
i had what people on this site call proximal. my doctor says that the
operation i had is restrictive, that is it does not rely heavily on
malabsorbtion. while there is some degree of malabsorbtion, it is very
little. from what i understand, distal relies primarily on malabsorbtion.
this is why there is a problem with absorbtion of nutrients. i personally,
would not have gone with distal because of the those long term effects. i
do have to take certain vitamins for the rest of my life, but i dont think
that i am as heavily dependent on them as distal patients. i had surgery
in june of this year and so far i have lost 50 lbs. i am almost halfway to
my goal. good luck!
— miles B.
September 25, 1999
I am distal, 5 yrs now. I was 262, now 112. The distal entails more risk,
I am compeltely dependent upon supplements for nutrition (tho I eat for
fun), and there are a few side effects. The gas is pretty potent, but I
take an antibiotic to reduce the incidence of gas. It helps! I am not one
with diarrhea, not for years. I only know 2 or 3 who still have it bad
after the first year or so. Because of my co-morbities, I would choose this
procedure again & again. I need every single lb off my lungs and
joints if I am to remain "normal". I avoid milk & sugar,
dont' graze and don't drink with meals. Not only do I not feel good if I
indulge, I am inviting the weight back on. From my perpectvie, the trade
off has been more than fair. My health (and labs) are better than ever
before when I was perpetually dieting. The forced supplementation means I
am fully nourished, so I have fewer cravings, and am generally healthier
then I ever was when "intact". I realize a distal is NOT for
everyone and have known folks to take 'em back down a notch. That would
NOT be me. I am a happy, happy distal! I admire you checking before
leaping!
— vitalady
September 28, 1999
Talk to your doctor about a medial
bypass which is half way between the
distal and proximal. It will give
you some of the benefits of both and
some of the disadvantages. I had
the medial and am 6 months post op
and have lost 80 pounds. Love it.
— Anna D.
October 2, 1999
I felt exactly the same way. My surgeon offered what he calls a medial.
It is between a proximal and a distal. To basically give you better
results like a distal without all the complications that a distal has to
endure. I basically have 60 inches of absorption where a distal has
between 40 and 50. Now I am only 6 weeks post-op but everything has been
good so far. I still have a little trouble with the bathroom area, so now
I wish I would have gone with the 70 inches of absorption instead of 60.
By the way a proximal has around 90 inches of absorption. Good luck on
your decision.
— bperrin
Click Here to Return