PAE - Has anyone had success?

Great that it has worked so well for you. Do you think who does it makes a difference or is it that you were a more suitable candidate? What tests did you have prior to the procedure ?

I had a CT scan with contrast 4 weeks prior. Doc said he thinks it will help me, and so far he was right.

I have no clue why it worked for me, its like the procedure was designed specifically for me!

I wish all find a solution, because the past 5 weeks have been the best in 5 years- quality of life!

can you say who and were your pae was done?

Dr McWilliams at UCLA.

What size was your prostrate before and after PAE?

My IR doc at Stanford indicated my prostrate size of 38 made me not a good candidate for PAE. Though he acknowledged it likely is the cause of my restricted urethra, by growing inward and around, squeezing it closed.

So now I'm treading water (all pun intended) utilizing numerous different/combined techniques, supplements, and CIC, hoping that something else will come along to help me. Or... oddly enough, that my prostrate will grow just enough to "fit" the ideal candidate profile so I can have PAE.

before was 70, not sure now only 6 weeks later.

The options you need are already available to reduce your prostate.

Please feel free to list all of them, with their Pro's and their Con's

Hi Bob,

Not trying to scare anyone nor am I anti-PAE. Just pointing out that not everyone

has had the same results and also pointing out that the study someone just posted was exerpted instead of quoted in entirety. I do hope you do well, and you should stay positive. It will be what it will be, no matter what anyone says at this point. I never had a procedure but my IPSS score went from "severe" to "mild" from CIC.

Jim

Bobcats,

I answered many times an wrote at least 20 posts about my extremely positive results with PAE performed at UCSD. I would say, my results are practically identical to yours and I'm 14 months post PAE without any subjective degradation. My PSA last week showed 1.8 ng/dL, which is approximately where it was 10-12 years ago. My subjective feelings are that I rolled back my UT system 20-25 years back. I suffered BPH at least 20 years, and I'm 72 now. No side effects whatsoever. Of course the stream rate is only 15-16 mL/sec, inferior to what a successful TURP will produce. My prostate was 120 g preoperative, too late for standard TURP or any laser procedure. Too much risk of complications or should be done in two steps, or Simple Robotic Prostatectomy. I have many friends who did it due to huge prostate or prostate cancer, which was localized inside the capsule. Everybody, even those who don't have incontinence and preserved sexual function advised me to avoid it at any possible means, if I can find a less invasive alternative. Some had lasting incontinence, all RE, which could happen with some meds, even after PAE and RESUM. Not a big deal after age 60. Orgasm is not diminished, just no chance for a sick offspring with a younger partner. More of convenience than a nuisance. I don't understand why there is so much fuss on this forum about RE, particularly from males who already had a quadrupole bypass, a couple of artificial joints and are in 65+ category. The best time to have healthy offspring for men is way before the age of 35.

I'm gals that you experience the same rejuvenation effect as I did and continue to have.

Everybody insisting on some secret addenda to the PAE reviews and trying to sell us how good is CIS during the safari in East Africa, is just hypocritical and jealous of our success. Their bladders due to years of procrastination to do something became incapable to empty the bladder and the only remedy left is CIC with drilling the urethra once it ends up in stricture due to infection and inflammation.

Don't listen to them. They never had PAE and are willing to hypothesize based on biased opinion AUA, which is afraid to lose their livelihood from lucrative TURPS and GLs operations.

Noninvasive procedure should eliminate TURP, bypasses and heart valves replacements made in open heart surgery. Future surgery will noninvasive or minimally invasive. Like cars will autonomous and Uber will eliminate filthy and expensive taxicabs.

Your score has gone to mild but how much has your prostate grown since starting cic?

yes i knew of your positive results i was just unsure of how long ago. 14 months is pretty damn good. I hope it continues for many years for the both of us.

gene97713,

Haven't posted here in a while... If you'd like me to start a new thread about PAE, please let me know.

I lived in San Diego from 2000-2016, but now reside a couple of hours drive from the San Diego area (Idyllwild), and am about to go on Medicare in two months. I've had BPH and chronic prostatitis for what seems like forever. If I remember correctly, my prostate is around 120 mL, so TURP and Urolift are out of the question, not that I'd choose either. The last uro doc I saw wants to carve out my prostate through my abdomen - I told him no thanks. I've been in the ER a couple of times in the last year for retention. Can't say for sure, but it's possible a combination of red meat and sugar seems to trigger this - I try to stay away from both now. Sex twice a week also seems to reduce the symptoms temporarily, leading me to believe it's the prostate, not any blockage in the urinary tract. Haven't yet gotten the hang of CIC, though I've tried when the retention hits. I take Flomax with OK results only when symptoms get bad, but sometimes have side effects (vertigo), so I don't like to take it if I don't have to. Other than my prostate, I am a very healthy, very active 64 year old with no other issues. I haven't drank alcohol in years.

I am very interested in PAE, and am happy to hear of your success at UCSD, a great medical center, IMO. Did you see Dr. Picel? Were you on Medicare and was it covered by that and/or your supplemental policy? My concern is that I might be refused for treatment because my PSA was recently measured at 20. Normal for me, believe it or not, is 9-12 (I was biopsied in 2013 because of that, but no cancer). What criteria did you have to pass to have the PAE procedure done at UCSD? Besides my upcoming Medicare and supplemental insurance decisions, I have lots of things to consider. I've decided to quit procrastinating and do something about this.

Glad to see you and jimjames are still here!

Thank you,

Steve

It's been a month since my third PAE. I have seen a notiable improvement in stream starting about four days out from the procedure and it has been sustained since then. Still need the Flomax though. I suspect that there are other issues other than obstruction at play here. I plan to have a cystoscopy at 6 months to verify that the prostate is out of the way.

Ptientx,

I will start with criteria for PAE, which were used in UCSD clinical study of PAE. It was PSA less than 10, I belive. Mine was 4.6 before PAE, dropped to 1.2 ng/dL 4 weeks after. The resent, after 14 months is 1.8. Dr. Picel, who performed my PAE, moved to Stanford Medical School to continue his research on PAE. You unusually high PSA in the absence of PC is probably due to the chronic prostatitis, which I never had. PAE is currently covered by Medicare, but you might need a supplemental to cover 20% that Medicare B won't cover. It might be expensive in the setting of the University clinic, where salaries are high and equipment expensive. Regarding all these cries that PAE is not for everybody it's true only to the extent that it's not for those who can't find a well qualified and trained IR (presumably from a reputable Medical school). Then teh results become dismal.

University Medical Scool I will remind to everybody (specifically to those who are lazy to study Internet and help themselves) that first PAE procedure was invented and performed by Dr. Pisco from Lisbon Medical School on a 74 old male in 2010 on demand of the patient. The patient underwent TURP 8 years before and suprapubic surgery 3 years before PAE with poor results. The subject was married a younger woman. Few months after PAE his wife became pregnant and gave birth to a healthy child. At age 78 the same patient with stable results after PAE impregnated his young wife again and she again gave birth to a healthy child.

Dr. Pisco performed PAE on 91 patients in the next year after the first patient. His success rate was 98% (89 patients). Maybe, the reason for poor results is different than large median lobe? Mine was large and obtrusive...

I'm sure it's the training and knowledge of . the IR doctor ability to conduct the procedure without many restriction prevalent in USA clinics and hospitals.

Good decision to stop procrastinating! Instead of reading these nirvana CIC writers educate yourself well before going to the a good IR Professor. My supplemental was Cigna.

There quite few doctors around the country (mostly at University Clinics) that offer PAE. There are other criteria for PAE admission: size, general fitness, age, different scores, etc. Only the doc will tell you his criteria. It's not true that with 120 g prostate (my size), TURP, PLA, or GL are out of question. Some foreign operators tried it with the same rate of success that smaller prostates operator had.

Good luck anyway.

Thank you gene97713 & bruce19007 for your responses. You've given me plenty of info for further research.

Steve

if you haven't had an optimum result it could be that the bladder has lost elasticity and doesn't expand and contract as is usual. the urologist will be able to tell you when cystoscopy is done.