I wrote this in the chat room too, and I feel like I should get help here as well… Please give me your opinion.
To start with, I had understood that if I was uninformed and started with autologous costal cartilage but it became calcified and ended up as donor costal cartilage, I could still pay only the autologous costal cartilage fee. For now: 1. I asked the coordinator: if an x-ray at another hospital showed calcification, depending on the hospital it can be used or cannot be used. When I asked what this hospital’s view was, they said to go to a linked hospital for testing, and then proceed with donor costal cartilage. But usually people are not completely calcified, so sometimes they partially trim it and still use it. 2. I asked if, when autologous costal cartilage is changed to donor costal cartilage during surgery, the cost would be reduced (that is, if a partial refund is possible). I was told it would go down. 3. I asked on the surgery day: if autologous costal cartilage cannot be used and donor costal cartilage is used, will you tell me clearly? They said I cannot speak while waking, so they cannot tell me during surgery, but can tell me afterward. They also said there are much more cases where autologous costal cartilage can be used.
Because we discussed this on KakaoTalk, there is evidence left for the cost reduction, the parts where autologous costal cartilage was recommended, and that another hospital told me I had calcification.
But the surgery was done, and as I feared, it became a case where autologous costal cartilage could not be used, and the surgery was performed with donor costal cartilage. After surgery they informed me that donor costal cartilage had been used, and this is still within the worst-case scenario I had anticipated, so that part was acceptable.
However, the assigned coordinator was off, so another coordinator came while I was still in that half-conscious post-anesthesia state and explained very kindly; the conclusion was that donor costal cartilage would be used. The original coordinator had explained the fee incorrectly. There is no price change just because it changed to donor costal cartilage. In fact, it was said that adding donor costal cartilage normally adds several tens of thousands of won, but they decided not to charge it. It sounds like the remaining amount would stay as a surplus.
I ended up where I had tried for autologous cartilage, paid as expected for that, but then used donor costal cartilage.
I had been concerned about this possible situation and, after hearing in the cost section that it would be reduced in that situation, I chose autologous costal cartilage… (Under normal circumstances, of course, I also wanted autologous. I wasn’t going to ask for it to become donor cartilage just to save money)…
If I had known this would happen, I would have used donor costal cartilage from the start, since it is relatively cheaper and avoids chest-area damage.
Right after surgery, while still in a dazed state, they asked “Now tell me that you understand, right?” and I was so scattered that I could only nod yes-yes, and tears came out. The part I was very worried about—calcification—became real. Even after being told it was okay, I chose while worrying between donor and autologous, and there was the assumption that partial refund might be given. If donor costal cartilage was to be used, I think I would have thought more and heard out more hospitals. This definitely needs to be argued through, right?
What do you all think? Since there was an attempt to harvest autologous costal cartilage, I think it is reasonable to take that fee.