spiderman

Interesting thread Lauren. I have a couple of questions if you don’t mind. First let me set the stage by going through my general anesthesia history.

In the 80’s I had two rather lengthy surgeries under general anesthesia (2+ hours, 6+hours). In both cases I was totally out with zero recollection of the surgeries when I came to.

In the 90s I also had two surgeries under general, but both were shorter (around an hour) and in both cases I was not completely out. It sounds like I got the “twilight” treatment. The first surgery wasn’t too bad, but I was a little surprised when I wasn’t totally out and it was a little bit uncomfortable. The second surgery turned out to be for removal of a schwannoma in my left axilla. I’m not sure you are familiar with schwannoma tumors, but they are masses formed in the nerve sheathing. Not only was I not totally under, but there apparently wasn’t enough local anesthesia to block the pain. I remember excruciating pain and my arm flying all over the place as they pressed on the nerves. Of course I was in the in between state of feeling all the discomfort but not conscious enough to do anything about it. Had I been able to I would have punched the surgeon in the face with my good arm.

My most recent surgery was last year for the melanoma lesion removal (with skin graft) and sentinel node removal. I was very worried about the same “twilight” situation. To my delight I was totally under with no recollection of anything. This was about a 2 hour surgery.

I also recently had a colonoscopy, which is super short in duration, but I again was totally out. That really surprised me.

So my questions are:

Is the “twilight” decision based on surgery duration and/or surgery complexity?

Can I request to be put totally under even if it is a shorter and less complex surgery?

I have had zero issues with nausea or any other ill effects from anesthesia, so for me the deeper the better after that one horrible experience. In their defense, it was not known ahead of time as to what type of mass it was, so I suppose they may not have anticipated the difficulty of the situation.

I guess that raises one more question. If the situation turns out to be more difficult than originally anticipated, can the anesthesia be adjusted to compensate or are there pre surgery setup decisions that prohibit going deeper on the fly (i.e. breathing tubes, etc.)?

Thanks

Interesting thread Lauren. I have a couple of questions if you don’t mind. First let me set the stage by going through my general anesthesia history.

In the 80’s I had two rather lengthy surgeries under general anesthesia (2+ hours, 6+hours). In both cases I was totally out with zero recollection of the surgeries when I came to.

In the 90s I also had two surgeries under general, but both were shorter (around an hour) and in both cases I was not completely out. It sounds like I got the “twilight” treatment. The first surgery wasn’t too bad, but I was a little surprised when I wasn’t totally out and it was a little bit uncomfortable. The second surgery turned out to be for removal of a schwannoma in my left axilla. I’m not sure you are familiar with schwannoma tumors, but they are masses formed in the nerve sheathing. Not only was I not totally under, but there apparently wasn’t enough local anesthesia to block the pain. I remember excruciating pain and my arm flying all over the place as they pressed on the nerves. Of course I was in the in between state of feeling all the discomfort but not conscious enough to do anything about it. Had I been able to I would have punched the surgeon in the face with my good arm.

My most recent surgery was last year for the melanoma lesion removal (with skin graft) and sentinel node removal. I was very worried about the same “twilight” situation. To my delight I was totally under with no recollection of anything. This was about a 2 hour surgery.

I also recently had a colonoscopy, which is super short in duration, but I again was totally out. That really surprised me.

So my questions are:

Is the “twilight” decision based on surgery duration and/or surgery complexity?

Can I request to be put totally under even if it is a shorter and less complex surgery?

I have had zero issues with nausea or any other ill effects from anesthesia, so for me the deeper the better after that one horrible experience. In their defense, it was not known ahead of time as to what type of mass it was, so I suppose they may not have anticipated the difficulty of the situation.

I guess that raises one more question. If the situation turns out to be more difficult than originally anticipated, can the anesthesia be adjusted to compensate or are there pre surgery setup decisions that prohibit going deeper on the fly (i.e. breathing tubes, etc.)?

Thanks

Interesting thread Lauren. I have a couple of questions if you don’t mind. First let me set the stage by going through my general anesthesia history.

In the 80’s I had two rather lengthy surgeries under general anesthesia (2+ hours, 6+hours). In both cases I was totally out with zero recollection of the surgeries when I came to.

In the 90s I also had two surgeries under general, but both were shorter (around an hour) and in both cases I was not completely out. It sounds like I got the “twilight” treatment. The first surgery wasn’t too bad, but I was a little surprised when I wasn’t totally out and it was a little bit uncomfortable. The second surgery turned out to be for removal of a schwannoma in my left axilla. I’m not sure you are familiar with schwannoma tumors, but they are masses formed in the nerve sheathing. Not only was I not totally under, but there apparently wasn’t enough local anesthesia to block the pain. I remember excruciating pain and my arm flying all over the place as they pressed on the nerves. Of course I was in the in between state of feeling all the discomfort but not conscious enough to do anything about it. Had I been able to I would have punched the surgeon in the face with my good arm.

My most recent surgery was last year for the melanoma lesion removal (with skin graft) and sentinel node removal. I was very worried about the same “twilight” situation. To my delight I was totally under with no recollection of anything. This was about a 2 hour surgery.

I also recently had a colonoscopy, which is super short in duration, but I again was totally out. That really surprised me.

So my questions are:

Is the “twilight” decision based on surgery duration and/or surgery complexity?

Can I request to be put totally under even if it is a shorter and less complex surgery?

I have had zero issues with nausea or any other ill effects from anesthesia, so for me the deeper the better after that one horrible experience. In their defense, it was not known ahead of time as to what type of mass it was, so I suppose they may not have anticipated the difficulty of the situation.

I guess that raises one more question. If the situation turns out to be more difficult than originally anticipated, can the anesthesia be adjusted to compensate or are there pre surgery setup decisions that prohibit going deeper on the fly (i.e. breathing tubes, etc.)?

Thanks

That was exactly my case. I questioned how that could be at such a substantial depth (mine was .92 mm) but was assured that there was no vertical growth phase. And that was from a Melanoma center dermatopathologist so I have to trust it as being accurate.

I was just like you in terms of scouring the web for any and all information but I did not do it until after my surgical procedures. I was caught by the “deer in the headlights” syndrome prior to that so I just went with the doctor’s recommendations. Had I known what I knew a few months later I would have done some things differently, so although I know that it is stressful it is best that you become educated as you are doing. Just try not to overdue things. There is a point at which the additional knowledge gets outweighed by the additional stress. My advice is to try to decide when you have reached that point and when you have back off and let things play out.

University Hospital, also in Cleveland, has a top notch melanoma care team so you may want to consider them as well. Their dermatopatholgist is very thorough. He would be reviewing your slides as a first step.

University Hospital, also in Cleveland, has a top notch melanoma care team so you may want to consider them as well. Their dermatopatholgist is very thorough. He would be reviewing your slides as a first step.

Awesome news Jenn! You deserved some good news. I want everybody to get good news, but especially so for young people like you. 

Awesome news Jenn! You deserved some good news. I want everybody to get good news, but especially so for young people like you. 

Awesome news Jenn! You deserved some good news. I want everybody to get good news, but especially so for young people like you. 

The following is from the Red Cross web site regarding blood donation eligibility:

Eligibility depends on the type of cancer and treatment history. If you had leukemia or lymphoma, including Hodgkin’s Disease and other cancers of the blood, you are not eligible to donate. Other types of cancer are acceptable if the cancer has been treated successfully and it has been more than 12 months since treatment was completed and there has been no cancer recurrence in this time. Lower risk in-situ cancers including squamous or basal cell cancers of the skin that have been completely removed do not require a 12 month waiting period.

The following is from the Red Cross web site regarding blood donation eligibility:

Eligibility depends on the type of cancer and treatment history. If you had leukemia or lymphoma, including Hodgkin’s Disease and other cancers of the blood, you are not eligible to donate. Other types of cancer are acceptable if the cancer has been treated successfully and it has been more than 12 months since treatment was completed and there has been no cancer recurrence in this time. Lower risk in-situ cancers including squamous or basal cell cancers of the skin that have been completely removed do not require a 12 month waiting period.