FLA
Posted , 19 users are following.
I am interested in FLA. There has been one very good series of reports following the procedure in Houston. Another doctor provides the same treatment in both New York and another office in Florida. Has anyone had the procedure done by this doctor? I am curious to hear your experiences and results so far. Thanks.
0 likes, 115 replies
ES28567 richard11472
Posted
Hi Richard,
Good for you, looking into alternatives and doing your research! I was considering FLA but went with HIFU instead. I think both procedures have their advantages. However, it was explained by my doctor (who has performed both procedures) that HIFU is more accurate. He said the laser is like a lightbulb which emits the most energy at the source and then the energy tapers off making the laser less exact or controllable in comparison to HIFU.
That's not to say HIFU is better or better for your specific case. It's just the choice that was right for me. The FLA might be better for your circumstances but I just wanted to let you know about HIFU for your research and that my experience has been very positive so far.
joe74831 ES28567
Posted
Thanks Joe
mike588 ES28567
Posted
I looked up HIFU which I have never heard of - I saw the following statistics which would give me pause to try that. The statistics are for cancer patients so it probably would be different for BPH.
"Studies performed outside the U.S. report that potential side effects may also include urinary stricture (18%)2, retention (0.6%)1, incontinence (0.6%)1, erectile dysfunction (20%)1 and rectal fistula (1%)1. "
I saw a video on how it is done. I find it hard to believe it's more accurate then FLA. As far as I could find it is not approved in the USA, whereas FLA definitely is.
Where did you have it done?
ES28567 mike588
Posted
Mike, You must be looking at some very old information. Personally I have had none of the side effects you have listed. (I'm sure it is different for every individual). It is FDA approved in the USA (which is also what leads me to think your information is old). I had HIFU performed in Florida last August. Everything works as well (if not better) than prior to the procedure. FYI...I had BPH and prostate cancer.
mike588 ES28567
Posted
Hi - yes sorry after I wrote my comment I thought it might have been out of date. I'm very glad to hear it worked for you.
richp21 joe74831
Posted
uncklefester ES28567
Posted
My understanding is that FLA is far more accyrate. Laser is guided by real time MRI within a millimeter of of sensitive areas. I'm plamming on havining FLA done. Seems like a no brainer at this point.
mikemh richard11472
Posted
I mentioned FLA to my Urologist in the UK. He said that it was old technology and suggested that I might be a candidate for aquablation in the future.
He does seem to be up to date as he is the foremost Urolift person in the UK (I have had two Urolift operations), and also performs Green light surgery.
I wonder what the objective situation is.
Regards
Mike
j12080 mikemh
Posted
I wanted one thing and one thing only. Absolutely NO sexual side effects from any prostate procedure.
Peter02 mikemh
Posted
FLA is VERY NEW technology & from what I gather much more accurate than HIFU. I'm afraid Urologist's are being put out of work by interventional Urologists, firstly with PAE which is now being fully trialed by the NHS & you can now get that if you look around. I don't think you can get FLA in the UK yet but I might be wrong about that, to treat BPH & low grade cancer. It's a day case procedure & takes at the most 2 hrs. There are some 3T MRI's in the UK but whether they are being used for FLA I'm not sure.
uncklefester Peter02
Posted
<sarcasm> my heart really bleeds for the urologist that are losing money because they can't perform TURP any more.
mike588 richard11472
Posted
I had it done on Feb 14th also in Houston - it's too early to say for me as I had some other complications with kidneys (NOT due to procedure) and have to wear catheter for 3 weeks after procedure. Normally they take it out after a week but it takes about 3 weeks till it starts to work.
Private message me in case I forget to update.
uncklefester mike588
Posted
mike588 uncklefester
Posted
Yes, as I wrote, on Feb 14th - since I am still wearing a catheter there is nothing to report.
I think you have to take ES's remark seriously - if presumably an interventional radiologist says he's done both - either he is telling the truth or he is making more money doing HIFU - it's also possible I suppose he was not skillful enough to do FLA so his results were not good. The HIFU looks like it's guided by a computer not by hand. Personally I would want to know a lot more about HIFU and how the computer knows how to avoid places you want to avoid.
Motoman mike588
Posted
Mike,
I was a day ahead of you. Had it done on the 13th. I'm peeing better now, but it was a struggle the first week without the catheter.
Peter02 mike588
Posted
Mike, there appear to be a number of places you can get FLA for BPH in The States. Do you know them all & how did you choose which one? I think the most important thing is an experienced interventional radiologist & the number of procecedures they've carried out.
mike588 Peter02
Posted
richard11472 mike588
Posted
Rick
richard11472 Motoman
Posted
Rick
mike588 richard11472
Posted
Rick,
I'm a lot better than before the procedure, in my case my bladder was so badly affected it's hard to know if anything else would have been better - for sure in terms of no sexual side effects this has been great. I have ups and downs, and a recent down I just discovered was probably due to a UTI. My only complaint is I am still taking Flomax, but strangely it does not cause secul side effects either, whereas before the procedure it did. I'm hoping that my bladder will get re-conditioned so that I can stop the meds. If you are thinking of FLA from what I can tell it's still the best bet for minimally invasive procedure with no sexual side effects.
Michael