The statement actually reads, "This morning, First Lady Melania Trump underwent an embolization procedure to treat a benign kidney condition."
Yes. About five minutes after I heard the first report, I heard the updated disclosure statement. What you note is what the update indicates.
The condition was benign, not the surgery. Also, to remove the future source of an embolism would definitely require general anesthesia and invasive surgical techniques. The First Lady is also supposed to be in the hospital for the rest of the week, which suggests to me that it was a pretty serious procedure. I've had a few fairly intensive surgeries (several hours long) and always went home the same day.
.... General anesthesia is no joke. ...
I don't know that she was treated to remove a "future source of an embolism." I would think that could be handled medically.
She was given an renal embolization of some sort (there are several kinds of them).
That procedure deliberately denies blood to a mass in a kidney.
At the time I mentioned general anesthesia, I didn't know of the updated statement about the procedure's specific nature. I had assumed that she was given general anesthesia because the initial report indicated she'd be held in the hospital for the whole week.
Anecdotal experience for why I made the assumption I did:
I was put under "general" when I had my gallbladder removed, and the doctor wanted to keep me for two or three days after it. I asked them why, and they said for monitoring. I asked them did they have any reason to think something was amiss or that I was at risk. They said, "No," so I discharged myself, which they were okay with provided I waited 24 hours before doing so, and recuperated at home.
For the 36 hours I was at home, I would have rather had the dilaudid drip they gave me at the hospital, but I made do with the Perco-whatevers they gave me. Otherwise, I was far happier to be at home in my own bedroom, friends and family calling on me and decorating my home with flowers and plants, binge nap-watching stuff I'd DVR'd, eating my cook's much-tastier-than-hospital food, etc.
I will say that I found it odd that Mrs. Trump's office released a statement after she was in recovery. ...It seems like a brief press statement this morning followed by, "Please wish the First Lady a safe and successful operation. We'll have more details for you later," would have been customary or at least prudent.
As I noted in post #27, I think they should either said nothing about the nature of her specific condition and treatment, or they should have issued a precise and specific statement that didn't leave people wondering anything other than "how's she doing." Either one is fine with me, for Mrs. Trump, though a public personality, is, unlike her spouse, under no obligation to disclose her health status to the American people. There're no national security, public policy or succession implications to whatever be her health or lack thereof.