L.A.R. verses colostomy

[margin123]

My husband has an inflammation in his rectum. All biopsies came out normal, but the doctor is still suspicious. He said that because my husband is having fecal incontinent problems, that along with the inflammation, his entire rectum must be removed. He gave us surgery options and he opted for L.A.R. (lateral anterior resection) with a temporary ileostomy. However, at that time, my husband thought the inflammation was in his ileum. So now he is super depressed because from what we had read, reversals without a rectum aren't usually successful. So he has decided to just have a permanent colostomy bag and get it over with. He has been wearing depends for 6 months, fills his diaper all day long, and takes about 6 showers a day. His bum is also raw. He said that ANYTHING would be better than what he has to put up with now. Does anyone have an opinion as to whether he should try the L.A.R. and temporary ileostomy, and if that is not successful, then go ahead and get a permanent colostomy? We asked the doctor, "if it were your wife, what option would you choose?" He said L.A.R.

[To Good Health]

Welcome to this group. You will get more responses if you post on the general ostomy group as it gets much more traffic and also deals with folk who have temporary ileostomies.
I feel for your husband. My reversal was not successful due to rectal muscle damage from radiation and surgery, I believe. I tried it for about 18 months until I finally admitted to myself that I had fecal incontinence. During those months a cream called calmoseptine was my best friend. Anything for a diaper rash is also good. I found a pad inside the depends was useful because often only that needed to be changed.

You have a difficult decision to make and I could not advise you. All the best,
To Good Health