Posted , 11 users are following.
Been taking combo of Flomax and dutasteride and I still have to get up numerous times. I want to get the green light laser treatment, but I have not found a doctor in the Portland Oregon area who does it, does anyone know of one?
Thanks
0 likes, 52 replies
We want the community to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the community are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the community is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.
hank1953 lew82832
Posted
How did you decide on GL ? Hank
derek76 hank1953
Posted
Hank, Did my the PM's not convince you?
hank1953 derek76
Posted
derek76 hank1953
Posted
hank1953 derek76
Posted
derek76 hank1953
Posted
derek76 hank1953
Posted
From another forum in a two year follow up in 2005
Had my 2 yr post PVP check up yesterday, as part of the Laserscope KTP (now green light) 80W laser study. Still have retro, and have resigned myself to that's the way it's going to be, but at 75 guess I should be happy just to be able to ejaculate, wherever it goes. Everything still working fine, flow rate, max 20.4 mL/sec, avg 14.2 mL/sec with a total volume of 365 mL. Pre PVP numbers were 6 mL/sec, 2.5 to 3 mL/sec and 175 mL respectively. Less than 25 mL retention., pre PVP 40 %. The only poor news is the prostate has grown to 49 gms., 75 gms before PVP. Was 33 gms 1 month after the PVP. Still get up only 1 night in 3 or 4 to urinate, before PVP 2 to 3 times a night. Rarely have an urgency to go, except when I forget to go before putting my hands in warm to hot water. Still can't figure that one out. While I was there I talked to the woman who is the research study administrator for McGuire Veterans Hospital, Richmond, VA. She told me that of the 32 people still in the study, most of them now more than one year post PVP, 27 are well pleased with the results and 5 were very displeased. Originally there were 70 in the study who had PVP done. About 55 were very pleased and 15 very displeased. She said this is only study in the 5 years she has been the research administrator, where most of the participants are at one end or the other of the spectrum, with none at or towards the middle. She said in most of the studies the people are spread over the entire range, with most in the range between somewhat pleased to somewhat displeased. Not sure how those numbers compare to this newsgroup, but seems to be in the ballpark. What amazes me is the fact that such a small number in the McGuire study could be so close to this group.
gordy90287 lew82832
Posted
no, I do not know of a good one. I don't necessarily think it matters so much as I don't think that procedure works. Mine totally failed. I have a friend who had the same experience & I don't know of anyone who has had a succesful experience with the GL.
I was thinking about getting the full turp, but after reading a lot of comments on the forum I think I am not up for
the predicted pain, a likelihood of ongoing complications & outcome.
derek76 gordy90287
Posted
You have of course heard of Fake News:-)
I've PM'd you my GL experience from 2004,
hank1953 gordy90287
Posted
derek76 gordy90287
Posted
derek76 lew82832
Posted
Oregon Urology Clinic, P.C., 2222 N.W. Lovejoy, Suite 416, Portland, OR 97210 | 503.229.7722
lester90053 lew82832
Posted
derek76 lester90053
Posted
Source please of the statistics of GL hardly done any more.
edward_97123 lew82832
Posted
Lew: I reported yesterday that I had a GL in 2012. Prior to procedure my symptoms were reasonably "classic" BPH - frequent voiding during the day, then 4-6/nite, low volumes, dribbling, fullness feeling post void etc. My PSA was never above 3.3 during the previous 15 years so we didn't suspect a major cancer issue. Was on Flomax (or equivalent) for several years and it became less and less effective over time. Urogst suggested GL due to lesser complications than full blown TURP and a high success rate. Agreed to go ahead and procedure was uneventful. Sent home next day with catheter and instructed to remove cath next day which I did. As soon as I did, my voiding was essentially out of control. I had significant bladder spasming with concomitant voiding - averaged 25x/24 hour period (with a maximum of 45x one day) and it continued for approx ten weeks post GL. Urogst scripted several different antispasmodics which were ineffective, then performed a cysto and concluded that the GL was a "failed procedure". He determined that the GL process did not remove enough prostatic tissue to make a difference and actually exacerbated my symptoms - no kidding. My voids were usually 25 - 30ml/episode (never more than 50ml) and painful. He recommended a full TURP and I agreed since I was unwilling to continue with the constant urge/incontinence. That TURP corrected the post GL conditions though the healing process took several weeks.
Tissue harvested as a result of the TURP was sent to pathology for review. Findings revealed no lesions and were further determined to be reasonably dense (concentrated more so than the average case) which perhaps was less amenable to a GL protocol. Sorry, I'm unsure of the significance of dense tissue as a cellular and surgical matter. It does intuitively seem that attempting to vaporize a denser material with a laser might be more difficult than if that tissue is less dense. I now further understand that current GL equipment is more powerful than was the case 5 years ago. Higher wattage output at the laser probe tip enables more precise control and finer sculpting at the "work site". Generally, this likely means a higher percentage of successful outcome. Of course, each individual's case is unique and requires full consideration of all the variables by all interested parties.
One other detail that I discovered is that Medicare and some insurances reimburse the GL protocol at a higher rate than a TURP. Unsure of the reasoning behind this though, perhaps, could enter into some thinking about which protocol is recommended.
Anyways, FYI about my own experience with a GL procedure provided 5 years ago. No doubt others in the discussion group have other perspectives and a more positive report about their own experiences.
derek76 edward_97123
Posted