PAE at UCLA April 2019 update
Posted , 10 users are following.
My procedure has been a great success! To be realistic, I am not peeing like a teenager, but my symptoms are so much better than before that I can only thank God ( and the men on this forum ) for my quality of life today!
I just returned from a week long trip in Costa Rica. Travel was always the most difficult for me because of very frequent and very urgent need to pee! I used to spend my trips searching for toilets and long plane flights were miserable if that fasten seat belt sign lit up.This trip was GREAT!
The main difference for me now is that if I need to pee, I can hold it for as long as I need to without extreme urgency. When I get to the restroom PEE COMES OUT! Complete void, I am able to empty my bladder. Before PAE, if I had to hold it for 30 minutes because of plane or traffic or whatever, there would be extreme urgency that would set off a chain reaction for frequent urination and I all I could do was dribble out. This also resulted in 3 complete retentions at 54 years old!
So my 9 month update is wonderful! My vacation travel was so enjoyable without the constant need to pee. Again, no fire-hose here, just reliable and steady and manageable. I still travel with CIC out of fear, but in 9 months , I have not even come close to needing one.
I strongly recommend PAE!
Happy New Year to all!
1 like, 57 replies
arlington Bobcats
Posted
That's great!
Did you have an enlarged median lobe?
emil54651 Bobcats
Posted
before doing my procedure i looked at the PAE option. My uro in Houston adviced me then not to do it due to the median lobe. He said it will not work for you and i know what you need. i trusted him and he did the surgery. Wonderful doctor and human being!
steveyj emil54651
Posted
Thank you for sharing your experience. I’ve had three urologists mount a separate attacks against the PAE. Vigorous attacks. And in all three cases, they distorted the truth in order to do so – i.e., they misrepresented the facts that are laid out in peer-reviewed studies. (One misrepresented the radiation load by a factor of ten, one claimed PAE fails in over half of all patients, and one said PAE “was not around two years ago.”) And they’re not the only urologists who have put their own interests ahead of mine.(I have Gleason 6 prostate cancer, so I’ve been around the block more than once.)
I mean no disrespect to your doctor, but given my own experience with them, I don’t trust urologists. If your doctor cited a study showing that PAE doesn’t work in cases of median lobe, I would give that serious consideration. I mean that. But PAE takes money out of urologists’ pockets. And if there’s one thing urologists protect, it’s their income stream. That’s why I can’t put much stock in any urologist’s unsupported claim that’s designed to discourage a patient from choosing PAE. Urologists, as a group, have not earned my trust. Still, I thank you for your well-intentioned advice. I’m glad you have found a urologist you feel so good about. I wish you well.
emil54651 steveyj
Posted
after all, everything is business. Of course urologists want to have a nice life as well and of course not every doctor has the same abilities. On any topic there are widespread opinions. If a patient has time to find a doctor whom you trust, you are already well ahead. It certainly is also true that each body is different, reacts differently and thus the outcomes can vary as well.
steveyj emil54651
Posted
It's true, as you say, that each body is different. A treatment that helps one patient may not help another. Yes, there are always widespread opinions. That's often a good thing. I probably wasn't clear on one point. I don't for a moment begrudge any doctor a nice life and a healthy income. But I do object when a doctor deliberately withholds the optimum treatment and steers a patient towards an inferior quality of life, in order to line his own pockets.
Bobcats steveyj
Posted
In March of 2019 I met with a top Urologist, Dr Saigal at UCLA ( the same place, the same building where Dr McWilliams has been doing and studying PAE for many years ! ) I wanted a second opinion from my local urologist who recommended the TURP or some form of the TURP. Saigal basically concurred with my local guy, only he offered Urolift as an option as well.But he never mentioned Dr Justin McWilliams or PAE ( within walking distance of his office!) as an option.
There is a huge disconnect between IR and Uro. I don't believe it is a money thing! All of these doctors make plenty of money! I believe that Urologists have been trained and have studied urology based procedures and so they have no experience or confidence in PAE. In my opinion , it is that simple. I refuse to believe that a doctor will deliberately withhold a procedure to "get the business" in order to make his pockets fatter!
To be fair , all of the urologists ( which were 3 in total ) all wanted me on medication before doing any surgery or procedure of any kind. My stubbornness to remain MED FREE, kept me from long term med use. I found PAE on this forum and it worked in my favor. My wife found McWilliams at UCLA and I live in Los Angeles.
emil54651 Bobcats
Posted
that's an honest and open approach of yours. Although money is always an issue, I think you are right when you say about the training the urologists go through and they defend their skills. As for medication I had the same feeling. I would want to be med free and I therefore preferred to have a procedure done. After all, it is a choice....using meds, using catheters or trying to get a surgical solution. There is of course a risk involved. It would be interesting to have a statistic of all the procedures done and how the success rate compares.
steveyj Bobcats
Posted
Do urologists use deliberate tactics to take business away from radiologists, for their own financial gain?
Don’t take my word for it. Take it from the horse’s mouth, Laurence Klotz, of Toronto – one of most esteemed urologists in North America – and with good reason.
This article contains a link to a 7 minute video by Dr. Klotz where he introduces Micro-Ultrasound, the technology he pioneered to image the prostate.
Search: grandroundsurology using high-resolution-micro-ultrasound-for-prostate-biopsy-active-surveillance.
Because it uses ultrasound, it can be performed under the control of urologists, with no involvement by a radiologist.
Nowhere in his video does Dr. Klotz mention even obliquely that one byproduct of his technology might be to help patients. Yet three time he makes it clear that there’s a financial “battle brewing” between urologist and radiologist – and the entire motivation for his new device is to regain control over prostate imaging, which urologists have lost to radiologists. He does not mice words; he states his motivation explicitly.
“With the wave of enthusiasm for MRI, as urologists, we’ve lost prostate imaging, and that is not such a good thing for our specialty.”
“This is a disruptive technology which is a welcome challenge to the MRI fusion targeted world.”
Laurence Klotz is a brilliant doctor, a man of integrity who has helped prostate cancer patients enormously by championing the Active Surveillance. Yet even he has spent a decade and considerable resources towards the goal of increasing urology’s financial dominance, at the expense of radiologists.
Bobcats steveyj
Posted
Point taken Steve! However, I have never heard anyone on this forum accuse Dr Bagla of stealing Urology patients for his own financial gain. Even though he was willing to schedule PAE procedure on me based on 1 single phone conversation from thousands of miles away without any physical exam whatsoever. He never saw a medical record of any kind and knew nothing of my medical history.
It was my feeling that Dr Bagla's approach was/is - lets give it a shot and see what happens. I'm sure his intention IS to help, but he gets paid regardless of outcome.
Dr McWilliams on the other hand wanted to qualify me as best he could before committing to PAE.
steveyj Bobcats
Posted
All that makes perfect sense.
I was referring to urologists steering patients away from radiologists, not vice versa.
steveyj Bobcats
Posted
Great, thanks very much for that clarification.
I'll check with Dr. Isaacson, as you suggest.