Re: Oral drugs vs supositories for UC?

me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> Anon <anon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
>> I had problems with Canasa, but in my opinion a drug delivered to the 
>> problem, that doesn't go throughout your body is better.
> 
> Normally I would agree
> 
> But suppose the UC is higher up in the colon where the
> suppository fluids may not reach as it melt in the
> body?
> 
> Wouldn't there be some advantage to taking an oral drug
> as well?
> 
> Just curious...

I've been given a combination of both Asacol and Rowasa at the same time 
for one month periods to ease a bleeding flare quickly - that was back 
when my diagnosis was "indeterminate".  I was told that that amounts to 
attacking the flare from both sides, and that some delivery forms are 
more effective in certain areas of the bowel.

What I didn't do (because I wasn't told to) was to stay on the Asacol 
once the bleeding had been stopped (which was why I never encountered 
any side effects from it until after I was hospitalized and then put on 
it for a longer term).  They were just treating the bleeding and not 
maintaining me.  Yes, a one month course stopped the episode, but only 
for about six months of not taking anything at all.  Then I was back 
with another one.

Now that things are under fair control and I've been strictly sticking 
with my regimen of Colazal (balsalazide) I've been doing really well - 
no bleeding for nearly a year, other than after some extensive 
biopsies...and that ceased after about a week.

I have some left side discomfort, but very minimal compared to what I 
had been suffering...and I haven't even had to take a pain killer in a 
few months now.

-- 
      - Rufus