HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

New York Times article on Robotic Assisted Prostate Surgery

Support Forums
>
Prostate Cancer
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 2/14/2010 9:28 AM (GMT 0)
The article is titled "Results Unproven, Robotic Surgery Wins Converts"

Here is the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/health/14robot.html?pagewanted=1&th&emc=th

Happy Valentine's Day to all.

RickyD

Posted 2/14/2010 11:31 AM (GMT 0)
Happy St Valentine's Day RickyD and the rest of the bunch at HW -

Very interesting article - and good balance - the main thing is - as stated in the article - it does not matter whether you choose the new robotic procedure or traditional open surgery - as with any surgery - it is the "Measures like the number of operations a surgeon has done “still matter a lot,"
as well as fine tuning that experience " .... say it takes about 200 to 300 robot-assisted operations to become highly proficient."

The question facing those making that life changing decision - which is the best doctor - which is the best hospital for post op care - how many procedures has he done successfully - (would you even know which ones are successful ?) - do you want to be part of the doctor's learning curve?

I am pleased with my choice - my doctor and my hospital.

chocolate / sappy cards hugs
BRONSON
Posted 2/14/2010 3:47 PM (GMT 0)
In any community, whenever there is change, there is resistance. I have a tough time arguing against my decision for DaVinci, but it is equally important to remain respectful of each of our decisions, as each is different.
Posted 2/14/2010 5:30 PM (GMT 0)
My decision for DaVinci was really not driven by the method. The doctor now does only DaVinci. He has a doctor in the same practice who does only open. It was more the choice of the doctor, trusting in his choice of the tools he would use.

And I agree with one of the comments in the article - the outstanding results of a few people in surgery, regardless of type, lead us all to hope that when they pull that catheter, things will get back to normal fairly quickly, which is probably an unrealistic expectation. It certainly was for me. Many of us who are active on this board are part of the rest of the population for one reason or another.
Posted 2/15/2010 6:14 PM (GMT 0)

Once again the mainstream media misses the mark. The focus of the NYT article is about surgery type & costs, when the overiding considerations for any patient should be on SKILL and EXPERIENCE of the surgeons under consideration. That was, in fact, the theme if not the conclusion of the article published by Dr Hu last Oct (less than a wk before he performed my DaVinci RRP). Full text can be found at:

http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/26/14/2278

Of course determining experience is the easier of the two. Surgeons I interviewed all gave pretty specific and varied answers to how many RP's they'd performed, over how many years, etc. But they all answered the to me more critical skill question (i.e. cancer eradication) pretty similarly, something like "oh,.. in the 90%'s,... same as everybody else"). Vague at best.

Sure would be nice if there was a more objective way for prospective patients to determine success rates, but privacy issues stand in the way I guess.

Ralph 

      

Posted 2/15/2010 6:20 PM (GMT 0)
Law suits are the reason. It's all cma.
Posted 2/15/2010 9:55 PM (GMT 0)
 

Very interesting article since the doctor featured was my surgeon Dr. Patel.  I am happy with the surgery just not the recurrance of the cancer.  However, I am sure it was not the result of the surgery that some of the cells escaped.

Jerry1

✚ New Topic ✚ Reply