I would love to hear people's experiences of fills without fluoro vs. those with. The doctor I was planning on using has now put all fills on hold. I have heard of another fill doctor in the area but she does not have access to fluoro. This scares me a little bit. What do you think?

Thanks.

My first fill will be non-flouro. Assuming the doc can find the port,etc. And I can feel it, round and hard and smooth under my skin, so I don't anticipate problems.

I have heard others here recommend a flouro fill at least once a year, just to get a look at the band and all associated parts.

I'm self-pay, too. I budgeted enough to cover flouro filsl if needed, but will wait a year if possible, just to stretch the funds.

i prefer flouro, but non-flouro is cheaper and if your doc is good and the port is easily accessible, it works. i just don't think the technique can be a precise doing the fill 'blind'. just my thoughts based on my own experience.

Flouro isn't necessary unless your port is hard to access. I've had 5 fills, never needing flouro.

Contrary to some popular belief, flouro doesn't in any way guarantee a "better" fill. Barium isn't food and doesn't act like food so watching barium go through the band is unreliable in terms of how food will or will not go through. Flouro also can't predict post-fill swelling and cannot predict if the fill might "kick in" 1-2 weeks later.

The only thing flouro can, however, guarantee, is a more expensive fill. My surgeon only uses flouro when she can't hit the port easily.

Nancy

394/275/180

Personally for me, I like flouro, it is peace of mind being able to see the foriegn object in your body and being able to see that everything is where it should be. I like knowingmyport has not flipped, my band had not eroded, mypouch has not dialated or stretched, or my band has not slipped..I also like knowing he hit my port and did not miss with his neele of the saline, just my feelings on it