What irritated me was the factory nature of the thing. Is quite the huge money maker and then there is the question of the efficacy of it, the diagnostic utility.

 
My doc uses Miralax, in the industrial sized container (prescription, so it is cheap, much cheaper than Miralax purchased OTC). Mix it with a big bottle of Gatorade. No constant toilet presence needed, but you'd best be ready to get up an sit when the call comes. I've found I can get a good night's sleep before the procedure, with only one or two "get-ups" to vacate.
 
Propofol is the shiznitz Versed a good second.  
 

For whatever reason for the test, hope the results are positive...
No joke, had to have one in my thirties, no pain med cocktail, at all!
The tech, an obviously gay guy who commended me on my 'cleansing' who was assisted by a female who could play on any NFL offensive line.. Can't make this stuff up!
Best of luck

I've had three so far. Last time I added half a bottle of Chardonnay to my prep regimen. Made it go a lot easier, let me tell you! Gin and tonic is another option, hold the bitters.

When my kids were small, they would watch me start the prep and then get up a pool on when dad would first head for the bathroom . "I've got 7:30. OK, I'll take 7:50". I used to tell people who were hesitant to schedule one, that it was worth it for the drugs they give you .

Best wishes Jim!

From a four time veteran. 3 words

FLUSHABLE BABY WIPES

quote:

Originally posted by markstempski:
What irritated me was the factory nature of the thing. Is quite the huge money maker and then there is the question of the efficacy of it, the diagnostic utility.

As a response to this, my last colonoscopy saved my life. Literally!!

I was diagnosed with stage 2 rectal cancer as a result of the procedure and very close to becoming stage 3. Immediate treatment with chemo and radiation and ending with major surgery has led me to be cancer free now.

I don't give a damn how much money they made off of me or how degrading the procedure is.

Good luck Jim,

Jim

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jimbo54,

The prep is far worse than the probing.

For those checking in with fear in their heart for what's on the horizon, let me offer some advice I saw here some time ago, as well as other places.

Do NOT wait until day before to change your diet. IOW, for 1-2 days before hand eat much lighter, both in quantity and type of food.

Following that advice really made this all pretty much a non-event for wife and I last year. Also, our doc prescribed "Suprep", which is apparently much less severe than many of the other options. No cramps and such, just an opening valve.

Luckily I got the see-ya-in-10 ticket. Wifey gets to revisit in 5 ...

I'm a bit surprised that colonoscopy had not been relegated to the same historical status as "exploratory surgery". There are reliable detection methods available at a fraction of the cost and zero risk.

quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:
I'm a bit surprised that colonoscopy had not been relegated to the same historical status as "exploratory surgery". There are reliable detection methods available at a fraction of the cost and zero risk.

Care to elaborate some on this rather than just dropping it in, and perhaps discouraging folks from pursuing the procedure?

If you're referring to "virtual colonoscopy", a new-ish and developing CT procedure, I actually considered that. I work with a bunch of radiologists all over the country, and asked two that are good friends (and my age) for their recommendation and input. Both agreed that the technology has come a long ways and when I get another one done may be there. However they both felt that currently the risk of both false positives and negatives was just a tad high and recommended the peek in a pipe method. Backed up by that being their choice for them and family recently.

The stool sample/DNA tests are also pretty immature I think, but hopefully a better alternative very soon.

IOW, soon, but maybe not yet.

Like a lot of things, I suspect that when other less expensive options become viable and comparable you'll know that because insurance carriers will stop covering a colonoscopy as the primary screening tool.

eta - an interesting quote from an article just last year.

quote:

“The bottom line is that only three countries in the world have seen their colon cancer rates decline in the past 20 years,” says Dr. Weber. “Those three countries—the United States, Poland and Germany—all use the colonoscopy to screen for cancer. In the rest of the developed world, where stool testing is used for colon cancer screening, colon cancer remains the number two cancer killer.”

Link. Sure, you could argue the publisher has an interest in the industry but they focus more on treatment than testing I believe....

Still remember back when they only used a local ansthetic....

and Jim, when you ask where you should hang your pants, if the doctor answers, "right over there, next to mine..." ... get out!

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:

quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:
I'm a bit surprised that colonoscopy had not been relegated to the same historical status as "exploratory surgery". There are reliable detection methods available at a fraction of the cost and zero risk.

Care to elaborate some on this rather than just dropping it in, and perhaps discouraging folks from pursuing the procedure?

Sure. I AM NOT discouraging people from being screened for colon cancer. It is serious business and early detection is good. They may want to talk to their physician about other options if traditional colonoscopy is not appealing for any number of reasons. Up until a few years ago, the second best choice (testing for blood in the stool) would only detect advanced cancers. The DNA based testing available today detects cancers and advanced polyps at nearly the same level as colonoscopy. In fact, it does better in some areas of the colon that are more difficult to visualize with the scope. Because it is done every three years instead of 10, the cumulative rate of detection is even better, with more opportunities to catch early abnormalities.

The potential downside is that a false positive (about 13%) would require a colonoscopy to confirm and remove the growth. For me, an 87% chance I didn't need to go through the prep and procedure seemed a fair trade off.

In terms of procedural risks: There are none with DNA sampling. Colonoscopy is quite safe, but we have probably all known a few people who had some negative outcome. Risk from anesthesia, infection, perforations, etc.

As I approached 50, I read what was available on the various tests. I talked to my doctor fully prepared to do whichever test she thought best. In her opinion, Cologuard was a perfectly acceptable option given my age and family history. Your situation may be different.

BTW: I am not a physician and have no association with the developers of Cologuard.

quote:

Originally posted by Georgeair:

quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:
I'm a bit surprised that colonoscopy had not been relegated to the same historical status as "exploratory surgery". There are reliable detection methods available at a fraction of the cost and zero risk.

Care to elaborate some on this rather than just dropping it in, and perhaps discouraging folks from pursuing the procedure?

If you're referring to "virtual colonoscopy", a new-ish and developing CT procedure, I actually considered that. I work with a bunch of radiologists all over the country, and asked two that are good friends (and my age) for their recommendation and input. Both agreed that the technology has come a long ways and when I get another one done may be there. However they both felt that currently the risk of both false positives and negatives was just a tad high and recommended the peek in a pipe method. Backed up by that being their choice for them and family recently.

The stool sample/DNA tests are also pretty immature I think, but hopefully a better alternative very soon.

IOW, soon, but maybe not yet.

Like a lot of things, I suspect that when other less expensive options become viable and comparable you'll know that because insurance carriers will stop covering a colonoscopy as the primary screening tool.

eta - an interesting quote from an article just last year.

quote:

“The bottom line is that only three countries in the world have seen their colon cancer rates decline in the past 20 years,” says Dr. Weber. “Those three countries—the United States, Poland and Germany—all use the colonoscopy to screen for cancer. In the rest of the developed world, where stool testing is used for colon cancer screening, colon cancer remains the number two cancer killer.”

Link. Sure, you could argue the publisher has an interest in the industry but they focus more on treatment than testing I believe....

One of the current disqualifiers for the stool test is a history of polyps. 3.5 years ago, they found noncancerous polyps while performing an unrelated colorectal surgery and told me to get a colonoscopy within 3 years. Last November, I "graduated" from the 3 year colonoscopy regimen to the 5 year colonoscopy regimen when I was polyp free.

New way, plop in a box, just don't miss and make a mess for the mailman...

http://www.cologuardtest.com/

Got it.

Yeah, Cologuard is a decent option, but it seems target at the very slim population who "can't" have a colonoscopy, the much larger segment who "won't" due to other concerns. Of course, it also is intended to exclude folks with history of cancer, high indicators, under 50, etc.

A much better option than nothing, but those limitations cut out a large segment of the population I suspect. Hopefully the tests for this, and many other cancers, come along briskly. Being able to better screen is definitely the magic bullet, not just for CR cancer but so many more. I'm optimistic we're only years, not decades, away from improvements there!

I'm 46 and had one last year. As others have said, the prep sucks but the alternative is worse, I was lucky to got a clean bill of health. I lost a friend on Wednesday to colon cancer...she was 43 and leaves behind two children. I wouldn't hesitate to get in done again.

And then there is the huge flatulence when in the recovery room after the procedure...........

The procedure went well. They found seven polyps which the doc said looked benign but which they sent off to pathology anyway. I have to do it again in three years.

Having a small polyp farm down there, I wasn't a candidate for Cologuard. There are other issues with the Cologuard route. If they find abnormalities then you will probably have to have a colonoscopy anyway and some insurance providers give the patient (sorry) shit about paying for both.

It's important to get them done. My mom decided not to, developed colon CA, and had to wear a colostomy bag for the rest of her life (~20 years) - she was lucky to have that opportunity.

Several times,I helped her change the bag, clean the opening, and attach a new bag. Yech!!!! I just have to remember that when I think of putting off the scheduled colonoscopy.