Day 3... Results are in!

My results are in,  (drum roll please! haha)...

Estrogen:  35.  They would like it to be below 50.

FSH:  11.9. This is just a bit elevated over the 10 they would like to see - YIPEE!!

LH: 9.1.  She said this should be about 1/2 of the FSH level. (Which obviously it's not). The nurse said that this gives the doctor an idea of what type of protocol to put together.  I'll need to find out more about this later.

I love how without asking the nurse just gives the reference range for a result.  It's awesome.

From here, she will ask the doctor to put a protocol together.  They will determine if they will use this cycle or the next.   Oh my gosh! I didn't even think this cycle would be an option.  Happy dance!!!

She discussed Dr. Dandruffbeard's desire to have a sono-HSG before doing the laproscopy.  The nurse said, "let me just think of the polite way to say this".  I told her "there's no need, you can just tell me what he said".  She told me that Dr. Schoolie thought it was an "idiotic" thing.  She explained further to me, that it would be like having an MRI and seeing you have a tumour, but then saying that you need to look at someone's eyes before doing surgery.  Or, that if you had a mammogram and found a mass, but then wanted to do a breast exam.    She said he thought it would be a waste of time, using a less sophisticated technology and and that it would give us no more information then we had now.

She said if I needed to do the sono-HSG to follow the rules of the Canadian health care system, then to do it.

I asked her if I should be worried about being under his care?  Should I have someone else do the surgery?  Now I'm not so sure.  Ironically, I'm no longer trusting Dr. Dandruff's opinion.  Oh.  And did I mention that Dr. Dandruff is the head of his department at one of the larger hospitals in my area?  Now I can't get the thought of 20 year old equipment and dirty operating rooms out of my head. Yikes.

I might reconsider paying the $3,500 it costs to have the laproscopy procedure done at CCRM.  Maybe they could do it after my egg retrieval if we get that far?.

Dr.  Dandruff had also told me that if there was no hydrosalpinx shown that there would be no way for fluid to be moving in the direction of uterus.  That fluid is pushed out of the tube towards the ovary.  I asked the nurse for Dr. Schoolie's opinion on this.  She said that it is nonsense.  I asked why, she said that some doctors just believe different things.

Tubal Ligation Preoperative Consult

Well, it seems things are going to get a teeny bit more confusing before they get simplified.

I'm hoping it's like when you spring clean and need to spread things everywhere and make a big mess before putting it away neat and tidy.

I had my preoperative consult with Dr. Dandruffbeard.  Although strangely, today he didn't have any dandruff.  I wanted it to be simple, for him to concur with Dr. Schoolie's opinion, and book the surgery in early January.  The surgery was for what I described here, a laproscopy and possible tubal ligation.

Blah.  But not so fast.  I forgot that this surgery is "optional", and not 100% indicated by my previous tests.  It's just to basically rule a possible problem out, for the best chances of implantation.

Dr. Beard said that in Canada they do a sonohysterogram to determine if there is a hydrosalpinx that requires ligation.  He said they don't go by the x-ray (the HSG) because it is an imperfect test.  The rule in Canada is that if there is no accumulation of fluid shown in a sonosysterogram, they don't do a tubal ligation.

I didn't have a sonohystergram.  But I made a big oopsie and told him I had during my ODWU.  Now things are confusing because my whole consult was based on Dr. Beard reviewing the sono, then talking with Dr. Schoolie briefly, then doing the surgery.

I've messed things up.  :( So now I'm back tracking.

One unexpected perk was that the appointment served as a second opinion on the procedure.  Dr. Beard said that basically if there is no balloon of fluid in the tube aka. hydrosalpinx, that there is no way for fluid to leak back down into my uterus.  And that he doesn't think I have this problem anyways because I've had implantation at "a reasonable rate".  He said the fluid leaking out of the tubes causes an implantation problem, not a miscarriage problem.   He offered though to do what he could to help me.  Hmm, interesting.

Then we had a semi-awkward conversation about trust, that I'll have to write about another time.  I'm off to my exercise class.