fabfatgrl

Good luck evcase. I'm sorry you're losing your Band, but if it resolves your esophagus issues... then perhaps it's a good thing. :target:

You'll have to drink only a few sips, not a whole lot. Be sure to drink lots of water after, as barium can make you constipated.

Good luck Carlene. When I was having my first fill back in 2001 (on 9-11 if one can imagine), I went with a Bandster from NZ who was having trouble with esophogeal dilation. They unfilled her for a month, and things went back to normal for her. Hope you have the same result.

I know a lot of Bandsters who have done Weight Watchers or Nutrisystem. All are very happy... and most say this is the first time they've actually been satisfied with the portions. IMHO, it's a great way to optimize your Band and weight loss. They'll also provide you with maintenance help and long-term support which can be very helpful.

Who is your doctor??? Is he experienced with the sleeve?? Most Band to Sleevers I know are told that there is no guarantee that they'll wake up with a sleeve. The doctor first has to see the condition of the stomach (and esophagus) after the Band removal. I would be wary of any doctor who looks at the sleeve as the primary operation especially as you have had issues with your esophagus. You may want to post on one of the VSG boards (ObesityHelp or Yahoo!(Sleeve Gastrectomy)) and talk to some other Band to VSG folks for advice.

I think they just filed for PMA in April... so you may find it on the FDA site. Or try a EuroBandsters support group.... as it's been available there for longer. (Not sure if the info is the same as the old Obtech Swedish Band.)

Dr. Rutledge has shown really good results long-term (I think 6 years by now) with his MGB. But you have to remember, it's a different operation completely being malabsorptive. I'd also caution you to note that most studies comparing any obesity surgery to the Lap-Band do count PBing as a complication... yet you will not find them saying that dumping is a complication of their operations. So... I'm not sure how accurate is to say that there are more/less complications. Everything I've read says that the Lap-Band (and now the VSG) is one of the safest bariatric operations out there... precisely because they're not cutting or stapling your stomach or messing around with your intestines. We don't face the risks associated with those operations, which is a definite bonus. Rutledge does a lot of things right, I think. His manual on his site can be good reading for anybody undergoing any bariatric operation... and he really makes sure that his patients understand their operation and its risks/complications. He also seems to be very big on follow-up. I think for anybody considering any surgery, you need to hang out on the boards for those surgeries... and see what people complain about or talk about. Also go to the Revision Boards and see who is getting a revision and why. I've seen a few MGB revision patients... but not too many... no where as near as many RNYs or Lap-Bands. BUT, the surgery is not performed as often.

Oh I miss Publix... and their subs. I used to live in Florida and they were a favorite.

It depends where you are in terms of fills. Sounds like you were just Banded in February.. so maybe you've had one fill?? If so, then no your quantities are not that unusual. Once you get your next fill, this should drop. Don't worry. Also... ask yourself what you could eat pre-Band?? Was it just one taco and a side of pinto beans or was it 3 tacos, pinto beans, beverage, and dessert. :confused: The Band is supposed to provide a gradual reduction in quantities... which helps us in that our metabolisms aren't as out of whack as people with other surgeries.

I actually switched to six meals from three on the advice of a bariatric nutritionist. To be honest, I wasn't eating enough with only three... and it was leading to both cravings and a slow-down of weight loss. When I upped it to six, things got back on track again and the cravings lessened. I think if six mini meals have worked for you in the past, there's no reason why it wouldn't work again.

That's very common. Many people do not see a change in eating habits until their second or third fill. I know for me, my first fill did not seem to last very long. Don't worry, although I know it's frustrating! Things will get better.

I agree with the previous posters. I really think that aggressive fills are one of the biggest issues. That does not mean that one should not get fills... you need them to make the Band work. BUT, there will come a point where you are not eating very much and perhaps have stalled. Many people will choose a fill at that point... even if it causes severe reflux or whatever. A better option would be to work with the fill you have and increase your exercise or whatever.

It happens. I knew a girl way back in 2001 who got preggers right after being Banded. Basically, they unfilled her for her pregnancy and then refilled her after she gave birth. That's the good thing about the Band... you can do that. If you get pregnant right after another form of WLS, things can be a lot trickier. It is best to lose a majority of your weight first, though. Usually means a healthier pregnancy... less risk of gestational diabetes... etc.

I haven't seen that in the six years I've been Banded. I know quite a few people, far down the road, who've had to go for complete unfills due to reflux... or have fill removed due to reflux. Even the poll on this site, shows more than 60% of people experiencing reflux issues if they've been banded 6 months or more. http://www.lapbandtalk.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=89 May not be a scientific poll, but I can definitely say that I've seen at least 50% of people who've been Banded long-term (at least 18 months) and are filled having reflux issues. Most end up trying small unfills or total unfills to try and let things heal.

I'm a little worried that you're considering the Band when you already have Acid Reflux. A lot of Bandsters end up with reflux issues post-banding... so you may want to talk to a surgeon about that. As for insurance, I've yet to hear of an insurance company approving with a BMI below 35. BUT, there are studies going on right now on lower BMI Bandsters... so perhaps there's hope??

We must have been banded at the same time pretty much. I've had my Band for almost 6 years. I got it unfilled after 18 months due to pregnancy. In many ways, that was wonderful. I could EAT again. I didn't feel like I was starving myself. I didn't have to worry about PBing... things getting stuck...etc. (Well, pretty much... things still get stuck but it's rare... 3-4/x year.) Through two pregnancies, I maintained most of my weight loss, so that was great. I think the unfill is one of the great aspects of the Band. You can take a break. You can't do that with any other surgery. As for Sharon Osbourne and the life of the Band... you don't know which Band she has. She's had her Band for 10 years.. so 1996-1997. I think the only Band in use back then was the Obtech Swedish Band. If Inamed had a Band out, it was a very early version. I don't think the Mid-Band was out either. So while the Lap-Band's lifespan may be unlimited, we really don't know about the Band that Sharon had.

Negatives regarding food... if you're tight, you probably can't eat bread, big hunks of meat, Pasta, etc. Found it easier to purree most foods at home to avoid problems. Never really know when things are going to get sick... so it can be embarrassing. I remember runnign out of a friend's wedding reception and PBing 2 or 3 times in the hotel garden.

You'd at least want to wait 8 weeks post-pregnancy (to heal from giving birth)... and then I'd add 6 months for breastfeeding. BUT, remember, you won't be able to lift your baby right after surgery... so I'd really wait until the little person is at least one and walking. The year will fly by.

Fills don't hurt at all. Actually, IMHO, it's much easier to have a fill w/o anesthesia (usually they'll offer to numb you with a topical)... rather than with. Hurts a lot more to get the topical, than the fill As for needing fills forever... more recent studies have shown that the Band's membrane is semipermeable. So, you may need to get things checked every 6 months or so once you're on maintenance... especially if you feel like you're losing restriction (and don't want that). From the May 2005 issue of Obesity Surgery Permeability of the silicone membrane in laparoscopic adjustable gastric bands has important clinical implications. * Dixon JB, * O'Brien PE. Australian Centre for Obesity Research and Education, Monash Medical School, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. john.dixon@med.monash.edu.au BACKGROUND: The single most important attribute of the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) is its adjustability. Having the correct volume of Fluid within the band is crucial for optimal performance. We observe a small reduction of the satiety-promoting effect with time. The characteristics and clinical relevance of volume change have not been adequately investigated. METHOD: One observer measured the saline volume within the 10-cm Lap-Band in 118 consecutive patients who fulfilled the entry criteria. The same observer had performed and recorded the previous adjustment. Initial volume, final volume and time between observations provide the data for analysis. In addition, a range of adjustable gastric bands currently available were bench-tested to assess broad applicability of findings. RESULTS: The difference between observations varied from 0.0 ml to -1.0 ml, median of -0.1 interquartile range (IQR) 0.0-0.2 ml. Two factors were associated with volume change: time in days between the observations (r = -0.55, P<0.001) and the initial volume within the band system (r = -0.50, P<0.001). These two independent factors accounted for a significant proportion of the variance observed (Cox and Snell R2 = 0.45, P<0.001). Replacement of any discrepancy appears to maintain effectiveness. All six bands showed similar saline loss when bench-tested. CONCLUSION: Adjustable gastric bands are semipermeable, leading to a small reduction in saline volume with time. Patients should be informed of this effect, attend for regular follow-up visits and seek help if the band's effectiveness appears reduced. We recommend that the volume present should be checked and readjusted at least every 6 months. PMID: 15946451 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] And from an earlier study in European Radiology from 2001 pontaneous volume changes in gastric banding devices: complications of a semipermeable membrane. * Wiesner W, * Hauser M, * Schob O, * Weber M, * Hauser R. Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. The goal of this study was to prove that adjustable laparoscopic gastric banding (LAP-BAND) is semipermeable and that luminal adjustment with saline leads to spontaneous fluid loss, luminal widening, and effect loss which makes repeated readjustments necessary. In 64 patients stoma adjustment was performed with saline according to the guidelines of the manufacturer (group 1). In 32 patients hyperosmolar contrast material was used for stoma readjustments with the intention to detect a system leakage after spontaneous fluid loss and spontaneous luminal widening was observed (group 2). After spontaneous luminal narrowing had occurred in group 2, all patients from group 2 and all additional patients (n = 148) underwent stoma (re-) adjustment with iso-osmolar contrast material (group 3). Spontaneous fluid changes which led to spontaneous changes of the luminal width were then analyzed for the different filling substances in each group. Fifty-two patients from group 1 presented with effect loss because a spontaneous luminal widening had occurred secondary to a fluid loss of 0.1-0.2 ml/month. All 32 patients from group 2 presented with increasing obstruction and food intolerance because a spontaneous luminal narrowing had occurred secondary to a spontaneous fluid gain of 0.1-0.3 ml/month. In our patients from group 3, where stoma adjustment was performed with iso-osmolar contrast material, no spontaneous fluid changes were observed and luminal width/degree of obstruction did not change. The LAP-BAND is semipermeable. Stoma adjustment should not be performed with saline in order to avoid spontaneous luminal widening and the need for repeated readjustments. Stoma adjustments with hyperosmolar contrast material are clearly contraindicated since osmotic fluid gain leads to increasing obstruction. Stoma adjustments should be performed using iso-osmolar filling media which provide a stable luminal obstruction. PMID: 11288845 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] As for overeating, if you eat too much, you will PB (productive burp... like regurgitating more than vomiting.) HOwever, some foods seem to slide right through... ice cream, candy, Cookies, etc. Sadly. There are tricks, though.... like adding fruit to your ice cream, etc.

I wouldn't do it... but I would consider letting my husband do it.. .as he's a surgeon.

I'd ask your surgeon for recommendations.

It can (at least for me), but it's rare. Happens for me a couple of times per year. Usually it's gigantic hunks of meat... which to be honest, aren't really my thing anyway. Happened with a hotdog too. More likely to happen when I'm menstruating or preggers.

The stats he is quoting is from the early days of the Band when it was just approved. I totally remember the study and the discussions it caused on the Bandster boards. This was probably 2002 or so. I think you need to go with the operation you are comfortable with. Ask yourself, if I was to lose 50-60% of my Excess Weight, would that make a big difference in my quality of life?? The good and bad thing about the Band is its adjustability. You need to get regular fills... and may always need a bit of tweaking (due to permeability of the Band... they now recommend having your Fluid checked every 6 months during maintenance.) So, if this doc is not going to be pro-Band, and help you with your fills and such, you need to find another doc. Not one who is going to say... "Are you sure you don't want me to convert you to an RNY?" I really think that each operation is great for different people. I think you'll get the best advice from surgeons who perform all of the operations--RNY, Lap-Band, DS, and VSG. Who don't have a stake one way or the other. My Lap-Band doc was Dr. Rumbaut. At the time, pre-FDA approval, he'd done thousands of Bands. He has a Band himself. But he also does the RNY and says that it is a better choice for some people. I would try consulting with a pro-Band doctor as well... and see what the experience is like. And then, make your decision. I need to disagree with this... being a long-term Bandster. I know quite a few people who had to have their Bands unfilled due to reflux issues. If they refill, they will have those problems again. BUT, for whatever reason, they're not willing to have their Bands removed. So... in theory that's correct, but in practice, not always. Let's see what I can find for you that's more recent: Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2007 Jan-Feb;3(1):42-50; discussion 50-1. Links Comparative study between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding and laparoscopic gastric bypass: single-institution, 5-year experience in bariatric surgery. * Jan JC, * Hong D, * Bardaro SJ, * July LV, * Patterson EJ. Oregon Weight Loss Surgery, LLC, Legacy Health System, Portland, Oregon 97210, USA. BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) are common surgical procedures for morbid obesity. Few single-institution studies have compared LRYGB and LAGB. METHODS: All patients underwent LRYGB or LAGB at Legacy Health System. The data for the study were obtained from a prospectively maintained database. Preoperatively, most patients were allowed to choose between LRYGB and LAGB. Age, gender, body mass index, complications, mortality, and weight loss were examined. RESULTS: From October 2000 to October 2005, 492 patients underwent LRYGB and 406 patients underwent LAGB. The mean age was 44 +/- 10 and 47 +/- 11 years, respectively (P <.001). The mean preoperative body mass index was 49 +/- 8 and 51 +/- 9 kg/m(2) (P <.05). Patients undergoing LRYGB had longer operative times (134 +/- 41 min versus 68 +/- 26 min, P <.001) and longer hospital stays (2.5 +/- 3.5 d versus 1.1 +/- 1.1 d, P <.001). Blood loss was minimal in both groups. The percentage of excess weight loss was significantly better for patients who underwent LRYGB at all points of follow-up, except at 5 years. Total complications occurred in 32% of patients who underwent LRYGB and 24% of patients who underwent LAGB (P = .002). The 90-day mortality rate was .2% in both groups. The reoperation rate was the same (17%) in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing LAGB had shorter operative times and shorter hospital stays compared with patients undergoing LRYGB. LAGB was associated with a lower complication rate. Early weight loss was significantly greater after LRYGB, but the data comparing long-term weight loss after LRYGB and LAGB have been inconclusive. PMID: 17241936 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2007 Mar-Apr;3(2):127-32. Epub 2007 Feb 27. Links Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: 5-year results of a prospective randomized trial. * Angrisani L, * Lorenzo M, * Borrelli V. S. Giovanni Bosco Hospital, Naples, Italy. BACKGROUND: To perform a prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). METHODS: LAGB, using the pars flaccida technique, and standard LRYGB were performed. From January 2000 to November 2000, 51 patients (mean age 34.0 +/- 8.9 years, range 20-49) were randomly allocated to undergo either LAGB (n = 27, 5 men and 22 women, mean age 33.3 years, mean weight 120 kg, mean body mass index [bMI] 43.4 kg/m(2); percentage of excess weight loss 83.8%) or LRYGB (n = 24, 4 men and 20 women, mean age 34.7, mean weight 120 kg, mean BMI 43.8 kg/m(2), percentage of excess weight loss 83.3). Data on the operative time, complications, reoperations with hospital stay, weight, BMI, percentage of excess weight loss, and co-morbidities were collected yearly. Failure was considered a BMI of >35 at 5 years postoperatively. The data were analyzed using Student's t test and Fisher's exact test, with P <.05 considered significant. RESULTS: The mean operative time was 60 +/- 20 minutes for the LAGB group and 220 +/- 100 minutes for the LRYGB group (P <.001). One patient in the LAGB group was lost to follow-up. No patient died. Conversion to laparotomy was performed in 1 (4.2%) of 24 LRYGB patients because of a posterior leak of the gastrojejunal anastomosis. Reoperations were required in 4 (15.2%) of 26 LAGB patients, 2 because of gastric pouch dilation and 2 because of unsatisfactory weight loss. One of these patients required conversion to biliopancreatic diversion; the remaining 3 patients were on the waiting list for LRYGB. Reoperations were required in 3 (12.5%) of the 24 LRYGB patients, and each was because of a potentially lethal complication. No LAGB patient required reoperation because of an early complication. Of the 27 LAGB patients, 3 had hypertension and 1 had sleep apnea. Of the 24 LRYGB patients, 2 had hyperlipemia, 1 had hypertension, and 1 had type 2 diabetes. Five years after surgery, the diabetes, sleep apnea, and hyperlipemia had resolved. At the 5-year (range 60-66 months) follow-up visit, the LRYGB patients had significantly lower weight and BMI and a greater percentage of excess weight loss than did the LAGB patients. Weight loss failure (BMI >35 kg/m(2) at 5 yr) was observed in 9 (34.6%) of 26 LAGB patients and in 1 (4.2%) of 24 LRYGB patients (P <.001). Of the 26 patients in the LAGB group and 24 in the LRYGB group, 3 (11.5%) and 15 (62.5%) had a BMI of <30 kg/m(2), respectively (P <.001). CONCLUSION: The results of our study have shown that LRYGB results in better weight loss and a reduced number of failures compared with LAGB, despite the significantly longer operative time and life-threatening complications. PMID: 17331805 [PubMed - in process] Obes Surg. 2003 Jun;13(3):427-34. Links Comment in: Obes Surg. 2003 Dec;13(6):965. Outcome after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding - 8 years experience. * Weiner R, * Blanco-Engert R, * Weiner S, * Matkowitz R, * Schaefer L, * Pomhoff I. Krankhenhaus Sachsenhausen, Frankfurt Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Section of Bariatric Surgery, Germany. rweiner@khs-ffm.de BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been our choice operation for morbid obesity since 1994. Despite a long list of publications about the LAGB during recent years, the evidence with regard to long-term weight loss after LAGB has been rather sparse. The outcome of the first 100 patients and the total number of 984 LAGB procedures were evaluated. METHODS: 984 consecutive patients (82.5% female) underwent LAGB. Initial body weight was 132.2 +/- 23.9 SD kg and body mass index (BMI) was 46.8 +/- 7.2 kg/m(2). Mean age was 37.9 (18-65). Retrogastric placement was performed in 577 patients up to June 1998. Thereafter, the pars flaccida to perigastric (two-step technique) was used in the following 407 patients. RESULTS: Mortality and conversion rates were 0. Follow-up of the first 100 patients has been 97% and ranges in the following years between 95% and 100% (mean 97.2%). Median follow-up of the first 100 patients who were available for follow-up was 98.9 months (8.24 years). Median follow-up of all patients was 55.5 months (range 99-1). Early complications were 1 gastric perforation after previous hiatal surgery and 1 gastric slippage (band was removed). All complications were seen during the first 100 procedures. Late complications of the first 100 cases included 17 slippages requiring reinterventions during the following years; total rate of slippage decreased later to 3.7%. Mean excess weight loss was 59.3% after 8 years, if patients with band loss are excluded. BMI dropped from 46.8 to 32.3 kg/m(2). 5 patients of the first 100 LAGB had the band removed, followed by weight gain; 3 of the 5 patients underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP) with successful weight loss after the redo-surgery. 14 patients were switched to a "banded" LRYGBP and 2 patients to a LRYGBP during 2001-2002. The quality of life indices were still improved in 82% of the first 100 patients. The percentages of good and excellent results were at the highest level at 2 years after LAGB (92%). CONCLUSIONS: LAGB is safe, with a lower complication rate than other bariatric operations. Reoperations can be performed laparoscopically with low morbidity and short hospitalizations. The LAGB seems to be the basic bariatric procedure, which can be switched laparoscopically to combined bariatric procedures if treatment fails. After the learning curve of the surgeon, results are markedly improved. On the basis of 8 years long-term follow-up, it is an effective procedure. PMID: 12841906 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Most people require quite a few fills early on... fills may not last long at all. However, usually, the closer you get to your sweet spot, the longer the fill will last.

There have been a few studies published that show that the Band's membrane is semi-permable and so losing fills over time is normal. I had this problem, and Dr. Rumbaut filled me with a solution different than saline... which solved the problem. From the May 2005 issue of Obesity Surgery Permeability of the silicone membrane in laparoscopic adjustable gastric bands has important clinical implications. * Dixon JB, * O'Brien PE. Australian Centre for Obesity Research and Education, Monash Medical School, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. john.dixon@med.monash.edu.au BACKGROUND: The single most important attribute of the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) is its adjustability. Having the correct volume of Fluid within the band is crucial for optimal performance. We observe a small reduction of the satiety-promoting effect with time. The characteristics and clinical relevance of volume change have not been adequately investigated. METHOD: One observer measured the saline volume within the 10-cm Lap-Band in 118 consecutive patients who fulfilled the entry criteria. The same observer had performed and recorded the previous adjustment. Initial volume, final volume and time between observations provide the data for analysis. In addition, a range of adjustable gastric bands currently available were bench-tested to assess broad applicability of findings. RESULTS: The difference between observations varied from 0.0 ml to -1.0 ml, median of -0.1 interquartile range (IQR) 0.0-0.2 ml. Two factors were associated with volume change: time in days between the observations (r = -0.55, P<0.001) and the initial volume within the band system (r = -0.50, P<0.001). These two independent factors accounted for a significant proportion of the variance observed (Cox and Snell R2 = 0.45, P<0.001). Replacement of any discrepancy appears to maintain effectiveness. All six bands showed similar saline loss when bench-tested. CONCLUSION: Adjustable gastric bands are semipermeable, leading to a small reduction in saline volume with time. Patients should be informed of this effect, attend for regular follow-up visits and seek help if the band's effectiveness appears reduced. We recommend that the volume present should be checked and readjusted at least every 6 months. PMID: 15946451 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] And from an earlier study in European Radiology from 2001 pontaneous volume changes in gastric banding devices: complications of a semipermeable membrane. * Wiesner W, * Hauser M, * Schob O, * Weber M, * Hauser R. Institute of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. The goal of this study was to prove that adjustable laparoscopic gastric banding (LAP-BAND) is semipermeable and that luminal adjustment with saline leads to spontaneous fluid loss, luminal widening, and effect loss which makes repeated readjustments necessary. In 64 patients stoma adjustment was performed with saline according to the guidelines of the manufacturer (group 1). In 32 patients hyperosmolar contrast material was used for stoma readjustments with the intention to detect a system leakage after spontaneous fluid loss and spontaneous luminal widening was observed (group 2). After spontaneous luminal narrowing had occurred in group 2, all patients from group 2 and all additional patients (n = 148) underwent stoma (re-) adjustment with iso-osmolar contrast material (group 3). Spontaneous fluid changes which led to spontaneous changes of the luminal width were then analyzed for the different filling substances in each group. Fifty-two patients from group 1 presented with effect loss because a spontaneous luminal widening had occurred secondary to a fluid loss of 0.1-0.2 ml/month. All 32 patients from group 2 presented with increasing obstruction and food intolerance because a spontaneous luminal narrowing had occurred secondary to a spontaneous fluid gain of 0.1-0.3 ml/month. In our patients from group 3, where stoma adjustment was performed with iso-osmolar contrast material, no spontaneous fluid changes were observed and luminal width/degree of obstruction did not change. The LAP-BAND is semipermeable. Stoma adjustment should not be performed with saline in order to avoid spontaneous luminal widening and the need for repeated readjustments. Stoma adjustments with hyperosmolar contrast material are clearly contraindicated since osmotic fluid gain leads to increasing obstruction. Stoma adjustments should be performed using iso-osmolar filling media which provide a stable luminal obstruction. PMID: 11288845 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]