I've had UC since 2010, and never been in complete remission. Being sick/feeling this way has just become "normal" to me, as you can probably imagine if you have had the disease. I've had one colonoscopy each year since being diagnosed, and it's usually due to a strong flare, and the doctor wants to take a look. Most of my inflammation is in the lower left part of my colon, and in that area there are many pseudopolyps. My doctor said he could put me on immosupressants and biologics, but I have tried them before (6mp and Humira), and neither worked for me. Beyond that, I don't like the way I feel on those medications, so I think quality of life with taking them is something I'm considering; that and the fear of the rare, but potentially deadly side effects of them. Regardless, my doctor said that they would probably help, but it will be more difficult to screen for cancer because of the number of polyps, and I would need a colonoscopy every year. Does this seem right to people?
I scheduled surgery on May 5 with Dr. Haas in Houston, and he wants to do the surgery in three stages. I kind of appreciate this; I am feeling healthy relative to having the disease, but he says healing is more successful with three parts and they can test my colon to ensure I don't have Crohns, and if I do, he wouldn't give me a jpouch. He did a bunch of tests and said my muscles and everything look good down there, and my rectum isn't really affected, which gives increased chance of success post-surgery.
Anyways, because I'm kind of feeling OK now, I'm reconsidering going through this. Are the benefits really worth the cost of losing my colon permanently? I'm 27, unmarried, no kids, so that's also a consideration. I know moms do it all the time, but I'm sure it would be harder to have to have so many surgeries while trying to get pregnant or raising children. The time feels right in that sense, but I'm still wondering if my "normal" with being sick is better than being colonless.
Sorry for the rambling, but I'd appreciate any thoughts.