sara

Dear Chris,

Welcome to the site. Big hugs to you and your mom. I have not witnessed the bleeding aspect, but I did witness the ascites aspect with my friend. Early on, the ascites was able to be treated with a diuretic. However, as her organs started to go into failure, the only way to remove the excess fluid buildup was to go into the doctor to have the fluid drained. In retrospect, the ascites came towards the end of my friend’s journey. However, please note that my friend stopped aggressive treatment after she was deemed unresctable. I have noticed that many other cholangio patients on here have been able to find to effectively deal with the ascites over prolonged periods of time. In other words, my friend’s experience is just one of many – the information I’m sharing with you does not necessarily translate to your mom. Hopefully some of those on this site that have been met with success versus ascites will share their information with you.

Big hugs to you, Kris. My thoughts and prayers are 100% behind a truly unreadable scan. I’m glad that your doctor will be there next week to give you the news immediately. It’s just mean to make you wait any longer than you have already done.

All the time – especially the people that seem so lost and depressed. I really wish that they would come back and let us know how they are doing.

truth4u – you make a lot of strong accusations about Dr. Canady – do you have any support for these claims? For example, Neill came on here supporting Dr. Canady, and posted a link to a website describing his wife’s experience with Dr. Canady. A few of the others have shared their own experiences. I have not had a personal experience with Dr. Canady, but I found an analysis of the legal theories involved in a case pertaining to Dr. Canady and posted that summary. I think it is important to share all sides on the message boards – it gives the community here the opportunity to review as many details as possible so that he/she can make informed decisions regarding treatment. Therefore, please post the support for your claims. If you don’t have any support, I imagine that the claims will fall flat and do more harm than good.

The message boards are evolving – I think what is most appropriate for this forum is to post information that can either be substantiated by outside sources, or is clearly an opinion. I also think we need to refrain from asserting blanket claims without providing support. Most importantly, I think everyone in this community should be respectful of each other’s choices regarding treatment, and should refrain from telling each other that we’re making a big mistake. At the end of the day, each individual is making his/her own decision, and that decision is the right decision no matter if everyone else agrees/disagrees with the individual. I would be interested in hearing additional opinions – to that end, I will start a thread on the Suggestions Forum, and look forward to seeing more comments.

I am cross-referencing this summary on this thread since in involves Dr. Canady.

FYI: I cannot comment on the acuracy of the following summary, but I thought I would post it on here since there’s an ongoing discussion regarding Dr. Canady. The comments provided below were found at the following website: http://www.aana.com/resources.aspx?ucNavMenu_TSMenuTargetID=54&ucNavMenu_TSMenuTargetType=4&ucNavMenu_TSMenuID=6&id=2324

I will try and provide the actual case soon.

Canady v Providence Hospital
The case of Canady v Providence Hospital, 942 F. Supp. 11 (D.C., 1996) is a collection of the legal remedies that are often used to attack the denial or restriction of privileges. Jerome Canady, MD, a surgeon, met with the representatives of a hospital in the District of Columbia, indicating that he wanted to perform vascular and thoracic surgery, as well as general surgery. Over the next few months, Dr Canady met with a number of physicians associated with the hospital, discussing various types of procedures that he wished to perform but, when viewed in retrospect, not necessarily being guaranteed that he would be allowed to do so. He finally received a letter from the president of the hospital informing him of his provisional appointment to the staff, but the letter was silent as to privileges. When Dr Canady inquired what his privileges were, the president of the hospital responded verbally that as far as she knew he had been granted everything he applied for. However, the president of the hospital was not the person authorized to grant privileges.

Not long after Dr Canady began operating at the new hospital, things went rapidly downhill. Four months after he began performing operations at the hospital he was sent a letter stating that the hospital would not schedule a patient for thoracic surgery if Dr Canady was the private primary surgeon. As a result of problems he was having with the hospital, he reviewed his credentials file and discovered, for the first time, that he had not been given thoracic or vascular privileges.

Consequently, Dr Canady retained a lawyer and brought suit against the hospital. This resulted in a settlement in which both sides appeared to save face. The suit was withdrawn, Dr Canady’s privileges were reinstated, and Dr Canady agreed to furnish a written second opinion for certain cases. However, it turned out that this did not resolve the matter. Misunderstandings continued about Dr Canady’s compliance, and Dr Canady did not get satisfactory answers to questions about his privileges. Matters continued largely unresolved until winter when there was another incident in which another staff physician questioned Dr Canady’s competence. A proceeding for “corrective action” was instituted, and the process ultimately resulted in the suspension of Dr Canady’s privileges. Dr Canady’s suit is a catalog of legal theories that a practitioner can use to challenge the actions of a hospital in denying privileges.

Legal remedies
The first legal theory is a claim that the action of the hospital is a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act: “Every contract…or conspiracy in restraint of trade…is declared to be illegal.” (15 USC

Hello, Linda! Welcome to the site. We’re glad you found us, but wish you didn’t have a reason to find us.

Has your mom sought a second opinion?

Hi, Katia. I am sorry to hear of the bad experience in Spain. It’s really a rough road, and I hate to hear that it’s further complicated by people who are supposed to be part of your team.

Regarding Dr. Canady, I have guarded optimism at this point. I really hope that Dr. Canady can provide a surgical answer. At the same time, I am nervous that the news piece featured on the curedoflivercancer.com website may create false hope for many on these boards. We’ve seen numerous times that some surgeons are willing to operate, only to have the cancer recur in a few months. We also do not have any follow-up information regarding the patient featured in the news story on that website. Therefore, the news piece presented many conclusions that may or may not be the case, so I do remain guarded.

Looking at Dr. Canady’s listed credentials on the hospital website, he is listed as a “general surgeon.” The surgery involved with resection is really radical surgery. Therefore, I would personally want someone highly specialized in liver surgery, and certainly someone who has seen many cases of cholangiocarcinoma in his career. But that is my personal preference, and it certainly does not make it right. Only your dad knows what is right in his case.

If your dad is truly up to a trans-Atlantic flight, and the jet-lag that comes with the flight, then I would try and schedule a third opinion as well. Ideally I would go to Sloan Kettering in New York. However, if that is too much of a trip, I would go to one of the cancer centers in Pennsylvania:

Abramson Cancer Center
Fox Chase Cancer Center
University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute

All my thoughts and prayers are with you and your dad. Godspeed to you both on your journey. Please keep us updated.

Hugs,

Sara