Would you remove if you didn't have issues?

My gallbladder problems started in May this year when they found a polyp. Generally speaking, I don't have issues, I can eat everything and all I experience is daily mild back pain under right shoulder blade, sometimes burning between both shoulderblades and occassionally, pinching feelings under left ribs and in the abdomen. But all this is mild. I had only 2 attacks with pain not being severe enough to go to the ER and it was during summer.

I have some kind of flare ups. I mean, there are days without symptoms other than this mild back pain after eating and then happens a 2-3 days (up to a week) when I feel worse. Among those symptoms during flare ups I noticed: weakness, dizziness and tiredeness, puffy face, yellowish corners of the eyes and yellowish stool (normal consistency). Sometimes I feel full after eating/bloated and have trouble breathing with pounding heart when the pain is more intense, but it never reaches more than 5/10.

At first I thought removal would solve my problems, but after reading things here and there I learned that it may be actually worse. Now I eat everything without diarrhea, after I may experience bile acid malabsorbtion. Now I feel moderate pain but it may not stop after removal or get worse, if I develop bile reflux or other problems.

Doctors opt for removal, as polyps are at higher risk of becoming cancer than e.g. stones but what if surgery turn me into disabled person? My quality of life worsened after gallbladder problems started but I learned to live with it and I can't imagine it will be worse.