Hi Yank, - I need some clarification. In your Post and Signature you indicate that your post-surgery PSA tests have been 0.1, 0.1 and 0.2 but since you you use the "greater than" icon (>) as a separator, , it is a little confusing. Are you sure that these are actual readings or may they perhaps have a "less than" icon (<) in front of the numeric designation?
Since you are apparently using the Standard PSA assay which only provides results to the tenth of a nanogram, the presence of the < designation would indicate that it is the lowest reading reading possible with the assay employed, and is considered "undetectable". In verbal conversation this can often be addressed numerically, without acknowledging the "less than" symbol that is so important in such results if it is present.
Do you have printed copies of your PSA results? If you do not, I would suggest you obtain them now and in the future to avoid such potential confusion in communication.
This is particularly important at the levels you cite, since there is at least one PSA assay whose reliability threshold is 0.2 ng/ml. The size of your prostate should be accurately identified in the post-surgical Pathology Report, which you should also obtain, if you have not already.
If these readings do not have the < icon preceding the numbers, they are actual readings and could, potentially, indicate possible treatment failure and I would suggest that a subsequent monitoring PSA in September should help clarify whether there is an upward trend or stabilization present. Close monitoring is highly recommended. Good luck! -
[email protected] (aka) az4peaks