Successfully got the plastic junk out

Hernia Discussion Forums Hernia Discussion Successfully got the plastic junk out

Viewing 40 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #32312
      Chuck
      Participant

      Folks very pleased to report that the unicorn doctor Igor Belyanski got my double inguinal bard 3 mD max mesh out of my body. Praise god. The operation took two hours. He said he got it all including the junk on the arteries. He did not cath me he did not cut nerves. The procedure was less painful than the original operation. Anyone having issues with their mesh should see this guy. I had little pain and none of the complications many complain of. Some here like Good intentions do a serious disservice to those suffering by posting reports of long recovery times and the dangers of mesh removal. Maybe if you have this done laparoscopically like he did or by an inferior surgeon but Dr B or Dr Towfigh can do this safely with the Robot. Bruce Rosenberg also did everything to discourage me from removal. Don’t listen to this guy either. There is hope folks. I found it very disappointing that some folks destroyed by mesh would not reach out to or assist their injured brothers. Good intentions refused to speak to me because our personalities were different? He could have helped a ton but chose not to.
      I would especially like to thank Jonah AGM Grant and Nick S for all their positive input. Theses guys nick in particular saved my life. To any of you considering removal my door is always open to you. Do not let corrupt doctors tell you you have prostatitis or it’s all in your head. This plastic junk is pure poison but there is hope. If anyone wants to call me personally I am happy to speak to you at length and do anything to help you. I live near DR B and you are welcome to stay with me if you like if you want to consult him. He is a humble guy who will make no promises but he saved my life. This has been the worst year of my life. Crooked doctors told me this junk was safe. I read the to mesh or not to mesh debate between Bebdavid and Voeller. Voeller destroyed bendavid arguing in favor of mesh then proceeded to get his own hernia fixed at shouldice. This guy should be arrested for the harm he has done to me and others in service to the devils who make this plastic poison.

    • #32313
      Good intentions
      Participant

      Dr. Voeller had hernia repaired at Shouldice? Do you have more info?

      Congratulations on making an informed decision. Good luck.

    • #32314
      roger555
      Participant

      Congratulations. It looks like you had the best possible outcome.

    • #32315
      Watchful
      Participant

      It’s excellent that you found a good way to get this done, Chuck, and it sounds like a success.

      Indeed, Voeller had his repaired at Shouldice. In fact, he had two repairs there. Surprising, isn’t it?

      Voeller/Shouldice

    • #32316
      pinto
      Participant

      Did my previous post just get swallowed up and vanished in thin air?
      It did. It did!

      • This reply was modified 4 weeks ago by pinto.
    • #32318
      Good intentions
      Participant

      I see the one with the Voeller/Shouldice information. Thanks. It’s interesting that it says that Dr. Voeller went to Shouldice because he could not have laparoscopic surgery because of previous procedures. But he could have had open mesh implantation. A Lichtenstein procedure, supposedly the best open mesh procedure. Dr. Voeller must have been aware. He is a professor of medicine. It would have been about 2000 – 2004. Open with mesh, or Shouldice? He chose Shouldice.

      From the article –

      “said Dr. Voeller, who underwent two Shouldice repairs more than a
      decade ago after being deemed ineligible for laparoscopic surgery because of previous procedures. ”

      One method for the masses, another for the elites. Shameful.

      Dr. Voeller has been publishing about hernia repair since the 1990’s. He chose Shouldice over open mesh implantation.

      https://www.uthsc.edu/faculty/profile/?netid=gvoeller#Scholarship

    • #32319
      Monika
      Participant

      Congratulations Chuck ! So very happy for you 🙂

    • #32320
      Mike M
      Participant

      That is great news Chuck! I credit you to pointing me in the direction of Dr. Kang first. He provided me with the best possible outcome as well. Hopefully others struggling with similar circumstances will see your post as an inspiration to keep pushing until they find the right solution for them.

    • #32323
      William Bryant
      Participant

      Good news Chuck, it’s been a torrid time for you I know.

      What does it mean Voeller destroyed Bendavid?

      Anyway best of luck, Chuck.

    • #32324
      William Bryant
      Participant

      In the link from Watchful, Voeller states the low recurrence at Shouldice hasn’t been matched or replicated at other (presumably non mesh) centres..I thought it had.

    • #32325
      Watchful
      Participant

      @bryan

      I think Chuck was referring to this:

      Voeller/Bendavid debate

      After reading that, it’s pretty shocking to find out that Voeller chose Shouldice and not mesh for his own repairs.

      The statement about the inability to match the Shouldice Hospital recurrence rate at other centers is something that’s often repeated, but no one knows what it’s based on, and what those “centers” are. There are certainly individual surgeons who claim that they’ve been able to match that rate, such as the Biohernia surgeons.

    • #32326
      William Bryant
      Participant

      Although neither are desirable out of chronic pain and a recurrence, the aim surely should be to minimise or eliminate pain.

      I wonder what Pinto’s post was about. Maybe Pinto will post again.

    • #32327
      Watchful
      Participant

      Recurrence has been studied much more rigorously than chronic pain. In the old days in particular, there wasn’t much mention of pain, but it’s hard to draw any conclusions from that – it wasn’t studied much.

    • #32328
      Chuck
      Participant

      Thx folks. Voeller is a criminal and should be arrested for his lies. His article along with the towfigh yunis interview where yunis claimed lap complications were silly low and a bs you tube from Todd Harris claiming 20 percent tissue repair failure rate after 1 year is what drove me in the direction of dangerous and toxic lap mesh surgery. I developed Horrible prostatitis and terrible inguinal pain from this garbage surgery which should be outlawed. I went from perfect health to chronic pain thanks to these liars. I am hoping Dr Bs intervention will help me. The prostattitis which many surgeons told me could not develop from lap mesh surgery is resolving. Hopefully the inguinal pain will follow this forum was not as fully developed when I was searching for answers. It’s now clear that the only really safe surgery is that offered by dr kang. Anyone who opts for shouldice or desarda is taking a chance in my view. But obviously lap mesh garbage surgery should never be attempted. Dr b has removed hundreds of meshes but he still refuses to concede that mesh is dangerous. I am sure he would go to shouldice too.

    • #32329
      William Bryant
      Participant

      Hello Chuck,
      What makes Desarda and/or Shouldice chancey?

    • #32330
      pinto
      Participant

      @Good intentions writes,
      >One method for the masses, another for the elites. Shameful.<
      in response to Voeller choosing tissue repair. Completely untrue; however, you are not the only one on this thread to misinterpret the information.

      Voeller actually made the choice involuntarily. His first choice was lap but was disqualified. Further if you read the article being discussed, he clearly sees a role for both mesh and tissue repair. I was disappointed reading the article because this thread led me to believe Voeller was disingenuous, having the private belief tissue repair is superior. The latter is not borne out by the facts.

      @Chuck, I’m delighted hearing your great news. I’m happy for you.

      @Watchful, thanks for posting the article link. Excellent. It’s written so well, I’m envious.

      BTW, this website really is behind other social media technically speaking. I have never been so inconvenienced messaging as compared with other sites. It’s a pity.

    • #32332
      Watchful
      Participant

      @pinto

      Voeller chose Shouldice vs open mesh (Lichtenstein). The article mentioned that he didn’t qualify for lap mesh because of a prior procedure. However, he must have still had the choice between open tissue repair and open mesh, and chose the tissue repair which he said was perfect, but not something that could be reproduced in other centers. Seems pretty shocking in the context of the debate he had later on with Bendavid. People read such a debate, and are influenced by it. He should have at least disclosed that he chose Shouldice for his own body.

      • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 6 days ago by Watchful.
    • #32334
      Good intentions
      Participant

      Here are some more articles with Voeller involved. He often seems to take both sides, like a politician. Hard to believe that a person who states such strong opinions would submit to being told what type of surgery he needed. Especially a person building a reputation as an expert in the field of hernia repair.

      If you consider surgery as a business profession instead of as a calling to heal people it all makes much more sense.

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/In-the-News/Article/11-21/Hernia-Mesh-and-Litigation-Where-Things-Stand/65227

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/The-Great-Debates/Article/06-18/To-Mesh-or-Not-to-Mesh-That-Is-the-Question/46624

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/On-the-Spot-Expert-Forum/Article/01-14/On-the-Spot-With-Colleen-Hutchinson-Controversies-in-Hernia-Repair/24815

    • #32335
      Good intentions
      Participant

      Dr. Voeller is the head of the AHS Foundation, soliciting donations from corporations (interested parties) around the worlds.

      https://www.americanherniasociety.org/foundation

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/In-the-News/Article/08-20/More-Than-30-Years-of-Inguinal-Hernia-Surgery-Have-We-Moved-the-Needle-/59278

    • #32336
      Good intentions
      Participant

      Besides the Voeller situation and other comments, it will be interesting to see how Chuck does in the long run. I don’t see anything in the first post about the condition of the original hernia and whether or not Chuck will need another repair later. Or what Dr. Belyansky found as he removed the mesh. What was found? Was the mesh “perfectly placed”? Had it moved?

      There was somebody not too long ago who had his mesh removed months after it was implanted. His hernia recurred and he had a pure tissue repair later.

    • #32337
      Good intentions
      Participant

      Sorry, one more that really makes you wonder how Dr. Voeller’s opinion could have value. Earlier he cited works by the Danish Hernia Society. In this article he says he’s tired of the “Guidelines”. Kind of blows your mind that he would be teaching his students that guidelines for best methods have no value, whether you agree with the specific guidelines or not.

      The more I see of him in the media the more I wonder why they seek him out for his opinions. I think that he has just become one of the “go-to” surgeons for article fodder. “30 years later” and he is reduced to a professional complaining about how hard surgery is today. And he is a professor of medicine.

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/On-the-Spot–Expert-Forum/Article/08-20/On-the-Spot-The-Art-of-Herniology-2020-Part-2/59283

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/On-the-Spot–Expert-Forum/Article/08-20/On-the-Spot-The-Art-of-Herniology-2020-Part-2/59283

      You can visualize him stamping his foot as he makes this comment about his feelings:

      Agree or Disagree – “Guidelines for hernia repair are valuable.”

      Guy Voeller, MD: Disagree I am really tired of all these guidelines. Hernia, lap cholecystectomy, whatever—I hate them. They are too long and tiring to read, and are usually based on flimsy data. Laypeople (i.e., lawyers and hospitals) see them as “standard of care,” which they are not. They are a waste of time for the most part. Practicing surgeons never read them and it has become an ego thing for the many of the people who make up the guidelines. They serve no real purpose and need to be stopped, now! That’s how I really feel.”

    • #32339
      MarkT
      Participant

      I am genuinely glad to hear the removal surgery went so well and I truly hope it proves to be a lasting, trouble-free fix for you.

      Also hoping that means an end to your sometimes rude, misleading, and/or irresponsible posts…but I guess time will tell on both counts lol

    • #32344
      pinto
      Participant

      @Watchful, you did it again in expanding our horizons by posting the link for “To Mesh or Not to Mesh.” Thank you!

      That’s a fun article, and one immensely engrossing because lo and behold the medical community endorses active debate about its own standard practice. I was surprised that the forum actually was a medical one! Kudos to them.

      Specifically about this thread’s attack on Voeller–your attack is all fiction. Why? Because apparently you misread/ misinterpreted this article, “To Mesh …”? Really??? Yes. Did you notice a very significant line of Voeller’s, his very first? Apparently not.
      He states:
      “I have been asked to defend the use of mesh….”

      This means: 1) Apparently a major and/or esteemed medical publisher invites him to represent his field. 2) Being the “rep,” he naturally must favor the tenor of his field over his own view.
      3) In doing so, his purpose is to try to win the debate not only for his colleagues but to further debate for advancement of medicine. 4) This may mean playing devil’s advocate even though he personally benefitted by his own surgery at Shouldice. Indeed he might purposely avoid personal experience in favor of solely published research and generally accepted viewpoints.

      As I pointed out earlier, Voeller is not against tissue repair; he sees a role for both that and mesh. He laments that medical schools are not teaching tissue repair. This thread having excited me about an apparent scandalous action by this doc Voeller, I was disappointed to find nothing of the sort in the articles referenced by this thread. Quite a disappointment, so touche 🙂

    • #32345
      Watchful
      Participant

      @pinto

      Incorrect. He was not playacting on request just for the debate, or anything like that. He heavily pushes mesh as superior (although evidently not when his own body is at stake). Read this:

      Voeller on mesh/tissue

    • #32346
      pinto
      Participant

      I never said he was playacting and of course it should be expected that he pushes mesh–he’s a mesh doctor. However my point still stands: he approached the debate as a rep for his field which likely constrains certain things he might say otherwise. Moreover playing devil’s advocate is common in academic debate, quite educational, and hardly a moral issue that you wish to make.

    • #32347
      pinto
      Participant

      BTW, thank you for another excellent article reference. However nothing I have seen evinces your claim that

      “He heavily pushes mesh as superior (although evidently not when his own body is at stake).”

      In the same article he pushes tissue repair, telling surgeons they should be able to offer patients both methods!!

      I myself am not promoting mesh; rather I am promoting effective reading and fair minded criticism, just be to be clear about it. As I said, this thread led me onto a primrose path of disappointment. I wanted to read about some juicy medical scandal but find none.

      • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 5 days ago by pinto.
    • #32350
      pinto
      Participant

      Whoever sells the IT system for this website should be ashamed for offering such an inferior product. Never have I been more inconvenienced messaging than here.

    • #32351
      Watchful
      Participant

      He is describing mesh as superior, non-mesh as not recommended, but says surgeons should learn a tissue repair technique so that they can offer it to patients who want it for “whatever reason”. Here’s what he days about mesh vs non-mesh:

      “I think at present where we are with inguinal hernia repair is best summed up by the recommendations of the Danish Hernia Database. Based on data from 10,000 inguinal repairs a year, they recommend the use of mesh for primary inguinal hernia repair, laparoscopic or open depending on the surgeon’s expertise, laparoscopic has less acute and chronic pain, and tissue-based repair is not recommended.”

      How is that consistent with choosing Shouldice for his two repairs? Absolutely egregious.

    • #32352
      pinto
      Participant

      @Watchful, I admire your perspective and know you are quite knowledgable about things, hernia. However, in this case, I think you are overlooking certain possibilities that none of us can be privy to.

      First, he obviously chose mesh for his own personal repair, isn’t that correct? Second, he apparently wanted the same method but his condition didn’t permit it. So how is that inconsistent with his beliefs–or being dishonest? Ok, so he ended up going with tissue repair. We don’t know the specifics that led him to that decision.

      And are you absolutely sure that Shouldice did not use mesh for him???
      Shouldice does use mesh in some cases.

      Some of you are jumping to conclusions that he must secretly think tissue repair/Shouldice is superior to mesh. He possibly could but it still would not entail immorality. He clearly stated that mesh’s popularity is at least partly due to its ease of use by general surgeons. Moreover the research findings in favor that he presents is compelling. He still permits that tissue repair is a viable alternative. From what I have seen, he is quite unusual the mesh doctor to push tissue repair even if minimally as he does.

      Finally it is not unusual for academic researchers to push one theory or perspective in their writings, yet possess privately quite a different view (unfortunately insufficiently evidenced). No-one would view such as being untoward or contradictory.

      Maybe Voeller possibly might think tissue repair superior but maybe only at Shouldice, thus being really an impracticality for other surgeons. His promoting mesh simply may be something he feels bound to do based on how he reads the available research. That IS being true to medical ideals. Again there’s no evident scandal with that.

    • #32354
      Good intentions
      Participant

      My opinion is based on the years of exposure to Dr. Voeller’s presentations and his participation in various trade journal interviews. Plus, generally, his professional affiliations. And my knowledge of how large trade societies work, and how large corporations influence people to help sell their products.

      Dr. Voeller has been consulting with the big mesh companies since at least 2011. Covidien, Bard, and Gore. He is a professor at a research university. Outside funding is huge for the big universities. Research funding has shifted from the government to the corporations dramatically since the 1980’s. His recent comments about pure tissue repair and guidelines are irrational.

      It’s an opinion. Feel free to find evidence that Dr. Voeller is open-minded and post it here. Everything I see shows a man promoting the use of mesh for hernia repairs, of all types.

      It would be fascinating to ask him today what type of repair he would choose for a normal inguinal hernia if he did not have pre-existing conditions. Would he choose TEP or Lichtenstein or Shouldice or one of the other pure tissue techniques? And, as a professor, he should be able to justify his decision. What would Voeller do?

      His information is on the internet. He is very active and gregarious and should be happy to answer the question. It should be a fun and interesting project.

      Here’s a 2011 presentation.

    • #32355
      pinto
      Participant

      “Dr. Voeller has been consulting with the big mesh companies since at least 2011.”

      Oh my goodness, a mesh doctor would stoop so low as to consult with a business?! Oh come on say it’s not true!

      “He is a professor at a research university.”

      C’mon, really, some mesh doctors actually are on faculties at universities that emphasize research? I suppose you’re gonna say next that he himself does research. Preposterous.

      “Outside funding is huge for the big universities.”

      Really, universities can’t make it on just tuition revenues alone?

      Research funding has shifted from the government to the corporations dramatically since the 1980’s.

      There ought to be a law against it! Must be a conspiracy afoot only to enslave us. Of course we know we can trust government to do the right thing, especially our politicians. They are but paragons of virtue.

      One problem: If you erase the entity of “corporation,” no longer recognizing its legal status, what would the fine people in the fine state of Delaware do without its monopoly on incorporating businesses? Think of the social problems that would result and seep into the Eastern seaboard states including that bastion of high morals known as “DC.” Sodom and Gomorrah, the likely outcome for the US of A? I’m starting to see your drift. Luckily I got a pitchfork in my basement.

      “Everything I see shows a man promoting the use of mesh for hernia repairs, of all types.”

      A mesh doc promoting mesh: It’s an image so so concerning. I had always thought docs were to keep their opinions to themselves. Not only that but the whole concept of trying to cover a gap rather than sew it tells you right there. The coverers are up to no good!!

    • #32361
      Chuck
      Participant

      Pinto I find it disturbing that you stick up for that scumbag Voeller. Especially since you flew to Korea for a tissue repair. Thanks to that mesh whore I will likely suffer with chronic pain forever. Todd Harris similar liar claims tissue repair failure of 20 percent after one year. These Guys are criminals and should not be given any passes. I really researched this stuff. I didn’t just listen to my idiot doctors and proceed to lap mesh butchery. But I was lied yo repeatedly and influenced by scare tactics. Shouldice has a26 percent chronic pain rate desarda had a bunch of failures. The shouldice clinic has a ton of negative reviews. This was really an impossible decision. But lying hypocritical al scum like Voeller made it so much harder.

      • #32366
        MarkT
        Participant

        Chuck, Shouldice has nothing close to a 26% chronic pain rate…stop misrepresenting the situation…and referring to doctors as ‘mesh whores’, ‘criminals’, and ‘scum’ is not acceptable. You are doing a disservice to the community and embarrassing yourself.

        I hope either you stop with these types of posts or that @drtowfigh bans you from this site. Enough is enough.

    • #32362
      Watchful
      Participant

      Chuck,

      Researching this is a tough journey. At some point, you do learn enough to see through the lies, hypocrisy, and just plain ignorance that you encounter.

      Once you strip all that away, you’re still left with a difficult decision. If your hernia isn’t too debilitating or dangerous, the best option is to avoid surgery and keep waiting. Otherwise, you have to pick some surgical solution.

      You learn that none of the options is good. You have to pick between scary and scarier basically. Mesh causing trouble is the more problematic possible outcome in my view, but tissue repair can be problematic as well. Bad outcomes aren’t as rare as one would hope with any of these. The more research you do, the more paralyzed with fear you get because there isn’t a good solution. You just get to choose which Russian Roulette game you want to play after doing your best to assess the odds for each game based on whatever partial knowledge you can glean.

      No one has definitive answers about these odds, even the top experts. Studies are all over the place, often not truly objective, and often contradictory. Ultimately, you gamble on a procedure and a provider to perform that procedure, and hope for good luck.

      I decided to gamble on tissue repair, and I think that’s reasonable for those who qualify for it based on criteria such as those used by the Shouldice Hospital. Still, should I pick the original Shouldice (with cremaster and genital nerve removal), modified Shouldice (leaving the cremaster and nerve intact), Desarda, or Kang? No one knows, and no one can answer that. I can get a good surgeon for all of these, and there’s a decent chance that things will turn out ok for me regardless of this choice, but any of these could also blow up on me, and then I’ll be beating myself up for not choosing one of the other options.

      For those who want the most proven option for low recurrence, the original Shouldice makes the most sense. For those who want the least invasive procedure Kang or maybe Desarda make the most sense. The modified Shouldice is kind of neither here nor there, but I’m leaning toward that. Tough choice, and maybe it doesn’t matter all that much, but I still fear trouble and regret.

    • #32363
      pinto
      Participant

      @Chuck, you immediately begin by making false accusations, exemplifying my point that some HT members misread, misspeak, mis-see hernia matters. I am not “sticking up” for the doctor in question. Not at all.

      As a matter of fact your mischaracterization early in this thread sent me onto a primrose path as I expected to find a scandalous doctor story–but there was none. @Good intentions unfortunately followed you in suit spreading false information. I merely have pointed out here and elsewhere the necessity for sticking to the facts about these matters.

      A good example why sticking to the facts is so necessary:

      Inguinal Hernia Mesh removal stats

      @Good intentions falsely told us that “Dr. Ramshaw is just an example of how a person seeking a simple hernia repair” ended up loosing his leg. But it wasn’t a “simple” repair for the guy had had ten previous surgeries for it and immense scar tissue the result. @Good intentions had not fully read the very article he referenced for us. As I found out, GI is not a person able to man-up for his mistakes as I found out much later when he sent me a crazy personal message falsely accusing me about a personal matter of mine none of his business.

      I get it–medical pain is debilitating. I greatly sympathize with it, for I have had my own share, believe me. However, eventually a line has to be drawn–if not– then we end in peril. Are we to stew in a pot of misinformation that leads to fatal decisions about our health? Surely you say, “Not!” Thus I ask for a fair reading of the facts. @Watchful makes an excellent post showing how perilous the decision is. I am a great Kang proponent but there never is an easy answer.

      BTW, Voeller was your IG surgeon who implanted you with mesh?

    • #32364
      Good intentions
      Participant

      Good catch pinto. I did oversimplify the Ramshaw error. It was a complex Ventral hernia, the 11th attempt to fix it. I am biased.

      (p.s. when referring to a person’s previous comments on the forum, always include the link to that Topic. It adds weight to your statement. Proof.)

      Here are the links.

      Post #30492 in this Topic has my error.

      Inguinal Hernia Mesh removal stats

      Here is where I originally referred to Dr. Ramshaw.

      New article from Dr. Bruce Ramshaw – Value over Volume focus

      Here is Ramshaw’s story. And the quote about the hernia.

      https://www.generalsurgerynews.com/Opinion/Article/10-20/My-Worst-Surgical-Error/60834

      I definitely over-simplified, by a large amount –

      “I was doing a very large complex ventral hernia repair that was located on the lower abdomen of a patient who had more than 10 prior attempts at repairing the hernia. After that many failed hernia repairs, the hernia was huge.”

    • #32365
      Good intentions
      Participant

      By the way, it seems that Dr. Ramshaw has definitely retired from surgery. His LinkedIn profile shows an end to his time as a surgeon. He is a consultant now. And a professor still, apparently.

      https://www.linkedin.com/in/bruce-ramshaw-70195215/

    • #32367
      Watchful
      Participant

      Chuck’s 26% figure for Shouldice chronic pain is actually lower than some studies (see below). I may not agree with his style, but I noticed that he is not pulling things out of nowhere.

      Chronic pain

      “Patients and methods
      Two hundred and eighty male patients with primary hernias were prospectively, randomly selected to undergo Shouldice, tension-free Lichtenstein or laparoscopic transabdominal pre-peritoneal (TAPP) hernioplasty repairs. Patients were examined after 52 months with emphasis on chronic pain and its limitations to their quality of life.

      Results
      Chronic pain was present in 36% of patients after Shouldice repair, in 31% after Lichtenstein repair and in 15% after TAPP repair. Pain correlated with physical strain in 25% of patients after Shouldice, in 20% after Lichtenstein and in 11% after TAPP repair. Limitations to daily life, leisure activities and sports occurred in 14% of patients after Shouldice, 13% after Lichtenstein and 2.4% after TAPP repair.”

      • #32381
        MarkT
        Participant

        Watchful, Chuck knows full well that he is cherry picking one study that is clearly not representational of Shouldice repairs. He has been called out for this before because it is not the first time. He bashes the options (and many surgeons) that he hasn’t chosen and then he uses over-the-top positive language to describe the options he does support.

        It’s misleading and it is irresponsible.

    • #32380
      pinto
      Participant

      @Watchful, (1) I think previously you referred to Shoudice’s criteria for accepting an IG patient. Would you inform us about that?

      (2) A camel’s nose in the tent is the fact that comparison studies of surgical methods may be inherently flawed because we don’t know how authentically the methods are truly represented. For example, it’s been said that “Shouldice” practiced apart from the hospital of the same name tends not to duplicate the same sterling results.

      You yourself may have pointed out that Shouldice by virtue of its stringent (?) requirements for intake to the hospital artificially lowers negative outcomes. I wonder really what effect this screening has–to what extent it really matters.

      (3) This is all just tip of the iceberg because the many variables that figure into determining post-op failure, including pain, are difficult to tease apart.

      (4) Argument we hear that mesh has an immense number of lawsuits as compared with tissue repair methods should be ignored. Why? Human nature to join the bandwagon: No way that 100% of mesh injury complainants are legitimate.

      It is well established that criminals steal cars and shoplift from high-end stores, having the notion that insurance companies will pay the victims for it. Train wrecks invite non-passengers to hop on the trains in hopes of reaping insurance money. The idea that the third-party (insurance) can well afford the costs of such crimes pervades society. It should be no surprise that some patients try to play the system for unjust rewards. Surely this does not apply to our fellow HT members, but it must be factor in the research studies cited.

    • #32382
      Watchful
      Participant

      @markt

      Chuck got this study from Voeller who cited this one along with two other studies showing high rates of chronic pain with Shouldice. This was in the famous debate with Bendavid.

      It will be very interesting to see the results of the chronic pain study which is currently being done at the Shouldice Hospital. Dr. Netto mentioned in his interview that the rate is higher than expected (at least when including less severe pain), which prompted the study.

      While recurrence is rare there, chronic pain seems to be not so rare. Anecdotally, I’ve seen quite a few reports of various levels of chronic pain and discomfort from ex-patients there, but none of recurrence.

      Patients complaining of this also complain that this is ignored there. If there’s no recurrence, the hospital considers the repair a success, and treatment for chronic pain resulting from their procedure isn’t offered there when there is no recurrence – people are told that they are one of the unlucky ones, take an Advil and go to their GP. The policy of not treating chronic pain without recurrence was also mentioned by Dr. Netto in the interview.

      • #32386
        MarkT
        Participant

        Watchful, cherry picking results and making broad claims like ‘lots of chronic pain with Shouldice’ is irresponsible…I don’t know how else to put it. If you want to defend that sort of behaviour on this site, that’s on you.

        Do you want me to start acting that way? Here we go…I hope you will defend my irresponsible behaviour the same way. Here’s my ridiculous context-free one-sentence statement: TEP recurrence rate is really high, over 25%.

        Now, should I be more responsible and include in my post the ONE study where that figure came from? Should I point out that the study has a very small sample size? That all of the data came from surgeries at one institution? That while the study is recent, the data is relatively old and even the authors note that things have changed since then? That’s not even getting into the finer methodological points….or do I get to just run around and say that TEP has over a 25% recurrence rate like how Chuck is characterizing chronic pain with Shouldice, and his various other ridiculous statements?

    • #32383
      Good intentions
      Participant

      “Chronic pain” has been poorly defined over the years that many studies have been done. This problem has been acknowledged in several publications. The paper discussed above is from 2004.

      As far as Dr. Voeller is concerned, you could look at what he does from another perspective – is he trying to understand and minimize chronic pain from hernia mesh implantation, today? As a thought leader and teacher. I don’t see any sign that he is. He talks a lot but never really offers anything constructive. If anyone can find something constructive from Dr. Voeller, please post it in refutation of my comments above. Maybe my impression is wrong. Ad hominem attacks on the person posting a comment don’t really offer anything. Post something useful.

      In contrast to Dr. Voeller, there is, at least, some acknowledgment from people with influence that the problem is real and needs to be studied more deeply.

      Acknowledgement that chronic pain is real by the Editor-in-Chief of Hernia

    • #32388
      pinto
      Participant

      Has Voeller denied chronic pain exists as a complication of mesh surgery? I could be wrong but I believe I read him saying something like there are so many variables involved, it is very difficult to pin down. Perhaps he has been looking at it but as of yet has not found something substantive to float publicly.

      Am I sticking up for Voeller, to echo @Chuck’s claim? No not at all. Rather I want to bring clarity to this discussion. As I pointed out previously Chuck, Good intentions, and maybe others apparently overlooked an important feature in Voeller’s decision for tissue repair of his own hernia. By the oversight I was inconvenienced 😀 by finding absence of a juicy doctor scandal story. Again, I am seeing a broken record of sorts in @Good intentions latest post about Voeller. He may possibly be deeply concerned about chronic pain in patients but as of yet stymied by the practicalities and realities involved. GI, it seems you are on a crusade of character assassination of certain doctors simply because they are not leading the fight to eradicate chronic pain as a complication of surgery.

      However Voeller may not be adhering to his Hippocratic Oath, it surely was correct of me to point out the serious omission of fact by Chuck and you in your unfortunate claim about Voeller’s own tissue repair received.

      • This reply was modified 3 weeks, 3 days ago by pinto.
Viewing 40 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

New Report

Close

Skip to toolbar