A change in thinking about prostate cancer in the Urologic world.

This is an interesting article about the change in thinking taking place in the PCa world.


Read article here...



Regards,

Bill

Bill,

Thanks for posting this info. I went to the site and found it pretty interesting. I posted the home page link in another thread for references purposes.

Thanks for taking the time to find it and for letting us know about it.


Sonny

I browsed the article. I think that for the past quarter century the marketing departments of the medical institutions that have been doing RP's have been messing with the percentages of their "research" departments.

I had my surgery six years ago so it was not a daVinci (sp?). I don't know of any research re: daVinci's but I suppose the ED problems are lower with this method.

I went to a prestigious medical center for my RP. Got the PC news on a Friday. Went in the following Friday for a consultation. I was told that with my age (52) I was much better off getting a RP. (I did consult another highly respected urologist b4 I went back and was told the same thing). My original dr. did discuss the other alternatives that day but was negative about each one. He also said that the longer I waited to decide to have the surgery, the less my chances of getting the surgery. He did not discuss any research re this, nor did I ask. Remember, I had only found out a week b4 that I had PC so I was still in a state of semi-shock.

It is interesting that the only statistics that I was given on paper were incontinence statistics. That rate was published at 2%. The ED figure was a word of mouth thing between my dr. and me. In all of the PC publications that were handed to me there were no statistics listed re ED. The figure I was given by my dr. was 85% of the men who had RP's (at their clinic) needed no medical help in achieving an erection within 18 months of the surgery. You can bet that I was very specific in my questions re this point. He looked me right in the eye when he told me that. Almost anyone will roll the dice at 85%. I did. I now wish I would have taken more time to make such a monumental decision.

I asked my dr. if he was a "great" surgeon. He said no. He said he could get me one of the 2 best in the place if I would wait. I waited for 40" and then the hotshot surgeon came in followed by an eager and worshipful intern. This guy told me I had made the right decision about getting the surgery and that he would be happy to do the surgery. The only available time he had was for the following Tuesday. I considered myself lucky to have such a fine surgeon, so I figured maybe my chances would be even better than 85%!

That meant I had 3 days to ready myself for the biggest operation of my life. I spent those days with my wife making love. How sweet it was!

To make a long story a bit shorter, I never regained my potency after the surgery.

Five years after the surgery the institution sent me a questionnaire re followup. In the questionnaire, they stated that after five years 85% of the men who had a RP at their institution were capable of potency WITH or without medical help.

That's quite a discrepancy from what I was told five years earlier. I felt like a victim of a shell game. This questionnaire led me to the conclusion that the marketing dept. of that institution was calling the shots about the "research." This institution made $30,000 on my surgery and on my hospitalization. I was there for a total of 36 hours.

That's a lot of money. There is a tremendous amount of pressure to keep "feeding the beast" in the health care industry.

My surgery fed the beast.

My wife has left me.

Had I known then what I know now, I would not have had the surgery.

Yes, I am negative. Yes, it probably sounds like sour grapes.

That's the way I feel now.