In early 2016 I was diagnosed with diverticular disease following a colonoscopy (I had had mild/moderate stomach pain for several months which came and went).
In July 2017 I some moderate bleeding in the stool and was given another colonoscopy. This time they found 1. small haemorrhoids 2. Non-specific inflammation in the sigmoid colon (acute and chronic inflammatory cells) and 3. Mild active inflammation in the rectum.
I was told at the time by the consultant that there was no direct evidence of IBD and that I should take a faecal calprotectin test in about 6-7 months. That test came back as normal (11mcg/g) and the consultant said no action was required. The whole consultation lasted for, literally, 5 minutes, during which time he said that I could “put this behind me” . I was shocked however when I saw the letter he sent to my doctor. In it, he wrote “he described a minor flare-up of bowel problems (in February this year there was some fairly mildish stomach pain which my GP had attributed to diverticular disease and which I told the consultant about) “WHICH WE CAN NO LONGER ATTRIBUTE TO DIVERTICULAR DISEASE GIVEN THE ENDOSCOPIC FINDINGS.” But what does this mean? My GP had attributed the minor flare up to diverticular disease whereas the consultant seems to directly contradict this view. Does this mean I am still a candidate for IBD which has yet to manifest itself more directly? At the moment I have no symptoms.
Apologies for sounding so dramatic, but this came as a nasty shock this evening - I thought I was out of the woods on this (particularly given the 5 minute consultation) but it now appears that this may not be so. I am aware this is a rather complicated car, but does anyone have any opinions? I am 63 and have no family history of IBD.