OH Moderators: SADI is not the DS, the DS is not the SADI. Given them their own board

Wow, I guess I'm naive, but I find it hard to believe that a reputable surgeon would not practice full disclosure about their plans! My surgeon has been pro-SADI from the get go and she has a very methodical approach as to why. I would think that a doctor who blatantly misled patients would be subject to disciplinary action.

nobody said anything about blatant. Surgeons use "creative phrasing" all the time. Even " reputable " surgeons.

Disciplinary action is up there with malpractice and is hard to prove.

No matter what surgery people have for whatever reason, WLS or no, you must absolutely get a copy of your surgical report and read it.

Part of the confusion is many surgeons refer to it as a "revised DS" which then just has people befuddled to start with. However, there are people who thought they were getting traditional DS procedures who wound up with the opposite.

We are always our own best advocates in healthcare, WLS or no.

My healthcare network has a v. transparent online presence. I can login and read all of my doctor's notes, etc. My surgeon's refer to a SADI procedure from the get go.

That's actually fabulous! A lot of people never get surgical reports at all. It's pretty sobering and unfortunate.

This was more of an issue when the SADI was first used and had, in my opinion, more to do with sloppy phraseology than truly trying to scam people although I'm sure there were a few of those too. There were some people that walked in knowing that they wanted the DS but not knowing exactly what that meant so if the surgeon wasn't very clear both sides walked away with different ideas about the surgery. This was especially true for those few surgeons that did the DS and then stopped doing them completely in favor of the simpler SADI. People went to them because they had information they were DS surgeons and they no longer were.

Sometimes it's lack of clarity. Sometimes it's just being unscrupulous. Because DS surgeons were rare, and becoming more so, it was common for doctors to promise a DS, and instead perform a distal RNY. These days its the SADI that often gets substituted.

This was so common that many referred to it as a "bait and switch" instead of a duodenal switch.

It's unethical, but there is no recourse. Among all the other paperwork patients sign, there are clauses that will include options for the surgeon. Things like changing a lap procedure to open if complications arise, or changing the surgery from a full DS to something else if the surgeon decides it's warranted.

There are patients on another group who were told they were getting DS and got SADI (Loop, SIPS, whatever the name of the day is) without their knowledge. It said DS on their submittal documentation for approval. Their surgery was approved and billed for DS, but their surgical report shows only one anamastosis instead of two.