When to remove gall bladder

My bilirubin hs been running between 65 and 35.  I have GB Stones.  My Dr. thinks the GB should be removed. Have had no attacks. Any opinions?

[jujimama]

my opinion - if it aint broken dont fix it. you havent had any attacks and experiencing no problems. I had my GB removed 3 years ago and have suffered so much since. Check out side effects of GB removal. There are many many pages telling you of problems associated with having it removed and people's stories.

I am not a doctor so talk to them about it and express your concerns. this is my first hand opinion why not to if you are not having problems.

[flasheldon]

jujimama-thx for the feedback. Am looking for additional opinions also.  

[abdsufferer]

I would agree that the removal of your GB should be questioned, especially if you haven't had any painful attacks from it. I would only be concerned that the gall stones could be obstructing the liver from disposing of its bile and may be causing things to "back up" into you liver. This could potentially cause liver damage in the long run.

I had my GB removed due to low function tests and still question its removal to this day (as it didn't help my pain issue). I would probably not think so much about it if I had gall stones, but I didn't. At least you have a clear answer that your bile is building up into stones and something is going on.

[Jaybay]

Your doctor has apparently found gallstones present through previous testing.  Many people have them but never have attacks or any other symptoms. Apparently your doctor believes that the stones are inhibiting the flow of bile and thus causing a problem with your liver.  Listen to him.  You can live without a gallbladder but not without a liver.  It never hurts to have a second opinion, or even a third opinion.  You should be absolutely certain that you know what will happen in surgery and more importantly, WHY.