Prostate Artery Embolization to Treat Prostate Cancer

The first thing a doctor will tell you is lets take it out.Why it just causes more problem. Have read many story's. the men were messed up for the rest of there lives. Keep your as long as you can ken

Carl,

PAE cuts off blood flow to prostate tissue so theoretically it would also kill off cancer cells. However, it is a relatively new procedure for the prostate and has only been used to treat BPH. I am not aware of any PAE procedures being done for cancer. Currently there are many treatment options for prostate cancer and each one has its own advantages and drawbacks, so you really have to do your own research and make your own decision. I researched the various options for four years before my treatment. I also interviewed 5 urologists before making that final decision. What is frustrating about prostate cancer treatments is that there ARE so many options. 

Most men just have their prostate removed (RP or RRP) once they get diagnosed and then deal with the side effects later. However, few take the time to do the research to find the treatment that would be best for them. You have to consider the Gleason stage (in your case 3+4) PLUS if you had a 12 core biopsy, how many cores were involved, and the percent of each core with the cancer. Also, if this is not your first biopsy, has there been progression from the first biopsy. So, there are many factors to consider. This forum is a great place to help you. 

I can tell you from my own experience that there is a psychological price to pay NOT being treated. You are always concerned that the cancer is progressing and might escape the prostate capsule. After being treated, I felt a sense of psychological relief. Of course, there is always a chance that the cancer wasn't eradicated 100%, but I do feel I can move on with my life rather than knowing that the cancer is still in me. 

Also, there really is no way of knowing that the cancer is slow growing or that it's nothing to worry about. The cancer can change. In my case I had Gleason 3+3 in two cores on the first biopsy and was classified as "very low risk". Then, a year and a half later after the second biopsy, was still 3+3 but 5 cores were involved and the percent involvement had increased. So, my urologist said there was "progression" and recommended treatment. After consulting with several other urologists, I agreed. Also, remember that a biopsy is only a sample of the total tissue so there might be some other tumors that were missed. I don't mean to scare you, but you need to be careful about your life and health. 

My very best,

Tom

Hello, a very pertrinent question which i thoroughly support. i have prostate cancer and the attitude of urologists to any other treatment than radical prostatectomy radiology or chemotherapy is appalling. My cancer is gleason 3+3 diagnosed 3 years ago, and i was hassled to have one of the three traetments from the first diagnosis. i have recently asked for a tesla 3 scan instead of the tesla 1.5 at my local hospital and they dismissed my request and demanded that i change my hospital. i have lost all faith in these peeople, i hesitate to call them doctors. Embolization seems a reasonable answer to the problem of small  tumours targetted by a tesla 3 scanner, but the doctors are not interested in even considering this. Why? perhaps a doctor would like to reply????