Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / April 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Urologists/surgeons in Rochester, NY area

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
eddiegr - 25 Apr 2006 15:46 GMT
This is primarily to Pops who is a frequent user of this board.
I noticed that you are from Rochester,NY and have had LRP in Roch., but
didn't see which Uro/surgeon you used and at which hospital.
I haven't been diagnosed yet, but have just completed a 6 core biopsy
due to a suspicious DRE.(No one else felt anything, previously. PSA is
only 1.71, Prostate 57 cc.)
I went to this Uro (Dr.Erturk) with moderate to severe BPH symptoms
(primarily because he specializes in PVP), but he wanted to rule out
cancer first prior to treatment.
While I know the odds are still in my favor, I wanted to be prepared
during the "results meeting"
I realize from previous posts that your surgeon moved out of town due
to lack of  a Robot in his practice, so he's probably not with Strong.
What practice did you use and at which facility. and what was your
experience?
Would you use them again? Have you any other comments about surgeons in
Roch?
While I wouldn't rule out radiation (I'm 64 years old), I understand
that if you've already got retention problems, you should avoid
radiation.
Steve Kramer - 25 Apr 2006 21:30 GMT
Suspicious DRE and 1.71 PSA are not all that convincing of Prostate Cancer.
But, if I were going to go through a biopsy, I'd want at least a 12-needle
test.  With a 1.71, at 6-needle could easily miss cancer.

Signature

PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA  .1  .1  .1  .27  .37  .75
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA  .34 .22 .15 .21 .32
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05,
2/06
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

> This is primarily to Pops who is a frequent user of this board.
> I noticed that you are from Rochester,NY and have had LRP in Roch., but
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> that if you've already got retention problems, you should avoid
> radiation.
eddiegr - 27 Apr 2006 00:44 GMT
Steve,
As it turns out, cancer was found. One core of six, 1% with T1a.
PSA 1.71!
The cancer was on the side opposite from where DRE showed a
problem,That side showed prostatitis.
Probably will go with robotic LRP since we have a high volume robot guy
in Rochester, Dr. Jean Joseph who does 3 per day.Will also see
radiologist, but with prostate volume of 57cc and retention problems,
probably eliminates brachytherapy.
Ed
ron - 27 Apr 2006 02:05 GMT
Since something was detected upon DRE, you are not T1.  Depending what
was noticed during the DRE, you'd be T2a, b or c.  Just guessing that
since the biopsy showed so little cancer, your probably T2a, but again,
it really depends on the DRE results...Ron
eddiegr - 27 Apr 2006 03:48 GMT
What DRE detected was prostatitis on the left side, DRE detected
nothing on the cancer side (right side) so Uro argues that it's T1a.
Ed
Steve Kramer - 29 Apr 2006 21:07 GMT
> Steve,
> As it turns out, cancer was found. One core of six, 1% with T1a.
> PSA 1.71!

You have a fine doctor, Ed.... and a sharpshooter at that!  Welcome to the
club.  Your Stage and PSA are very good.  Did you get your Gleason?

Signature

PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA  .1  .1  .1  .27  .37  .75
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA  .34 .22 .15 .21 .32
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05,
2/06
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

eddiegr - 30 Apr 2006 15:22 GMT
Hi Steve,
Yes,
I should have mentioned that Gleason is 3+3=6.
Are familiar with any of these Docs?
Ed
Steve Kramer - 30 Apr 2006 17:08 GMT
> I should have mentioned that Gleason is 3+3=6.

I expected a G6, but I was holding out hope for a G5.

> Are familiar with any of these Docs?

No, I don't know the docs, but that doesn't mean anything.  Other than my
doc and the three authors, I don't know any of the PCa doc.s

Signature

PSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46
Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c
RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins
PSA  .1  .1  .1  .27  .37  .75
EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47
PSA  .34 .22 .15 .21 .32
Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 (4 mo), 12/03, 4/04, 09/04, 01/05, 5/05, 10/05,
2/06
PSA  .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132
Non Illegitimi Carborundum

eddiegr - 30 Apr 2006 18:11 GMT
I have a second opinion coming from Johns Hopkins
Ed
Claude - 25 Apr 2006 22:00 GMT
Hi Eddie,

I'm not Pops, but I had my RP done in Canandaigua by a surgeon who has moved
to Chicago to do more LRP's.  However, in our Man-Man group, Dr. Messing at
Strong is the big name.  He's a big name in prostate cancer nationally, so
you probably would not be able to get him.  But you can try or see who he
recommends.
Claude
> This is primarily to Pops who is a frequent user of this board.
> I noticed that you are from Rochester,NY and have had LRP in Roch., but
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> that if you've already got retention problems, you should avoid
> radiation.
eddiegr - 26 Apr 2006 00:14 GMT
Thanks Claude!
That's great input. As it turns out my Uro is in the same practice as
Dr.Messing so it's good to hear good things about him. Dr. Joseph is in
the same practice. You probably know that Dr. Joseph is pushing
robotics very hard.
Ed

Rate this thread:






 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.