A diagnosis!

Submitted by ChannelD on June 1, 2008 - 10:28am
Body: 

I got the results from my ultrasound! They were twofold.

1) nothing structural was found. Now what does this mean exactly? If something is prolapsing is that structural? That they didn't find anything structural means - what? Not a prolapse? Or is this something that does not show up on an ultrasound? It did occur to me, as I lay there being rogered roundly with this wand, that they were pushing everything up and out of the way to get the wand in and what could that show? Has anybody been diagnosed with an (interior) ultrasound? Did they find anything?

But, the very sweet sounding girl informed me, they have discovered something important! They found (wait for it) that I AM NOT EMPTYING MY BLADDER! Anybody else feel a definate feeling of anticlimax? Since that was my presenting symptom? I felt badly pointing that out, since she seemed so pleased, but I rather diffdently said "I know. That's why I went to the doctor." She said "Well, you were right."

What, did they think I was making it up? Because I so love being penetrated - first by my original doctor, then by the ultrasound, then by the urologist? (more action than my astonished vagina has seen in years and years ha ha)

Speaking of the urologist. His opinion is evidently the sacred word. Is that really so? Is my problem primarily in my urethral area or is it primarily in my vaginal area? I get the feeling that the urethra/bladder is kind of a - what is that charming phrase the government uses? Collateral damage? Should I request/insist upon a referral to a gynecologist? I currently attend a health clinic where I am seen and treated by a parade of residents. So gynecology may not be the primary specialty of the woman who initially examined me. (who had seemingly never heard of a prolapse and if I had not insisted on a pelvic would have sent me on my way after getting a urine sample because my symptom sounded to her like an infection. Kind of like a computer flow chart - if dysurea then bladder/kidney infection.) What about chiropractic? Has anybody had any success with that?

Last question - is it possible to post a blog on this site? A continuing blog accessible all in one place? I emailed the forum but probably did it wrong because I never heard. Do any of you helpful and wonderful ladies have blogs on this topic I could read? I like reading people's stories and love to write. (see how I go on and on? Kinda like that)

Thank you all so much for all your help.

Cynthia

louiseds

June 1, 2008 - 11:58am

Hi Cynthia

There are a lot of problems with doctors apart from the power games that I documented elsewhere.

I was talking to an elderly and very conservative orthopaedic surgeon the other day about the dilemma of pelvic organ prolapse being a structural problem, rather than a gynaecological or urological problem. He really didn't understand why I was talking to a bones and muscles man about this, because, as an othopod he didn't know anything about gynaecology. The conversation continued and eventually he conceded that medical specialties are medical specialties. For specialists the human body is divided up neatly by a whole heap of wiggly dotted lines that say where one specialty stops and another starts. If he goes too near a bladder in his orthopod work he calls in a urologist, or if he sees that his work affects the uterus he will call in a gyn.

They don't operate over each other's boundaries. This is the only way they can assimilate all the information they need to take in, and get enough practice to become experts in their field. Unfortunately this means that they largely speak different languages and do not understand anything of other specialties. I was stunned at the simplicity of his reasoning, but it made me realise why we will never see western medicine becoming holistic. It is simply not the nature of the beast. It divides the body, rather than integrating it.

As prolapse has structural aspects, obstetric aspects, gynaecological aspects, neurological aspects, urological aspects, vascular aspects, gastroenterological aspects, dermological aspects, endocrinological aspects, and maybe others, it is highly unlikely that these guys could ever get their heads around POP. It is just too complicated for their tunnel vision view of the human body.

Another aspect is that you go to them with a problem (symptoms), they translate it into their language and give it a different word (diagnosis). Then on the basis of what they know about that diagnosis they work out what problem they will have to solve in order to solve your problem. Or else they will pick a treatment which has previously fixed those symptoms in another person, and hope it fixes you. It can end up that your aim and theirs are quite different, and sometimes you the patient do not realise this is happening.

I think the only way around this is for you to ask the doctor all the questions you just wrote in your post, so that you understand all the way through the process why the doctor is doing what he is doing, and can see where it is all going.

I am a real pain for doctors. They often call me an uncooperative patient, because I am always asking them why, and challenging them to justify the treatments or tests they want to do. I might also reject a quick fix treatment because I want a diagnosis, then when I know what is happening in my body I will talk treatments with him. As a result of that, I might opt out of western medicine entirely and treat it homeopathically, with body work, let it heal itself, put up with it and/or manage it. I might also get another opinion. There are also times when I will accept the doctor's advice first up. I am responsible all the way. After all I am the one paying the bill, and putting fuel in my car and sitting around in waiting rooms for somebody to stick me or prod me apart from being the person who has to live with the results of treatment. The doctor is just a part of my health care team.

Cheers

Louise

Mae

June 2, 2008 - 3:00pm

Hi Cynthia,

I had a pelvic ultra sound about 5 years ago, but at the time I did not have a prolapse. They were looking for fibroids as I was having some pain after sexual relations. I remember how uncomfortable I was while they were up inside me with the wand during the test. It seemed to take forever! Didn't help any that the young, cute tech that was doing the test was male!

Two years ago I had a Pelvic Sonogram, which was a much more comfortable test. This test was for my prolapse. The report did not use the word Prolapse but it did read in part, "The bladder is well distended..." I think the doctors are the only ones who have used the word Prolapse with me.

I would certainly want to see a gynecologist if I suspected prolapse. You want to have an accurate diagnosis so you know what your dealing with. I am not sure, from your posting, if any one mentioned that you have a prolapse, or you just suspect that you do.

You can go to Recent Posts to see what ohers have written on this website and/or you can put a topic you'd like to read about in the Search box. There is a wealth of information here.

Hope this helps some.

Warmest regards,

Mae