I am trying to find a doctor for greenlight

Posted , 11 users are following.

This discussion has been locked due to a period of inactivity. Start a new discussion

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

Report

52 Replies

Next
  • Posted

    Lew, I hate to dissapoint you but Green light may not be a good procedure. So many people on this forums had them with not good outcomes.

    How did you decide on GL ? Hank

    Report
    • Posted

      Yes Derek. It did convince me that you did have a good GL. I never doubted that. I am also sure that many others did have good outcomes. Hank
      Report
    • 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.

       

      Report
  • 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. 

    Report
    • Posted

      Good for you to chime in Gordy. I can only speak from observation but you, you speak from experience. Hank
      Report
  • Posted

    Researched for you from 6000 miles away.

    Oregon Urology Clinic, P.C., 2222 N.W. Lovejoy, Suite 416, Portland, OR 97210 | 503.229.7722

    Report
  • Posted

    Green Light is TURP with laser. The long recovery and results are similar. It is hardly done anymore.
    Report
    • Posted

      All procedures are opening a channel whether they use a hot wire or a laser. Laser seals off the blood vessels so less bleeding and quicker recovery

      Source please of the statistics of GL hardly done any more.

      Report
  • 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. 

    Report
    • Posted

      GL is a more expensive procedure due to the cost of the laser rods although the hospital stay is much shorter . TURP just uses the same device over and over.
      Report

Join this discussion or start a new one?

New discussion

Report as inappropriate

Thanks for your help!

We want the forums to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the forums 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 forums 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.

newnav-down newnav-up