good new.....good on yah!
I think the result is dependant on how sensitive the test is.....I believe
you are doing fine. if not excellent.
oh, those other problems will start to improve.
walking helps, and a positive attitude is best of all.
good wishes....
jloomis

He probably said "Less than 0.1" which is considered undetectable using the
standard assay.  That's good news.

I had my operation in September.  For the last two weeks I have finally
gotten to where I seldom wear a pad.  My friend Jason who had the same sort
of operation said that at the six month point there was a sudden profound
improvement in the incontinence... well he was right.

As far as willie standing at attention, my doc said there was probably nerve
damage.  In spite of that I do have some response to stimulation of the
right sort and it is improving on a slow basis.  Some guys report that it
takes up to 18 months to get back up to speed.

God Bless,
Steve Tew

I'm not an expert on this, but I'm guessing that there are
several factors at work in deciding whether to get an
"ultrasensitive" test or not.

The first, obvious one, is availability.  Your doctor may be
using a laboratory that doesn't offer ultrasensitive tests.

I would think that switching labs is a little complicated.  He
may be getting more tests than just PSA done on blood samples
that he sends.  So to switch, he'd either have to draw two
samples, or switch to a different lab for more than just PSA.  It
could involve issues in labelling, pickup and delivery, etc.  It
could also be that the government insurance program mandates what
lab the uro uses.

There may also be cost and insurance issues.  Maybe
ultrasensitive tests cost more.  Maybe the insurance won't pay
the extra cost.

Then there are questions about whether a more sensitive test
would benefit the patient.

I don't know the answer to that.  If you got a test result that
said .04, then one that said .07, then one that said .10, what
would you do differently?  Would you schedule radiation?  Would
you begin hormone therapy?  Would you have additional tests?  Or
would you wait until you got a result that said .2 before doing
anything?

If the latter (wait until you saw .2 before doing anything), then
the more sensitive test could get you started worrying sooner,
but wouldn't necessarily have any effect on your treatment.

I get my PSA tested in the U.S. by a lab that uses < .2 as the
minimum reporting point, and reports in increments of .1.  So my
testing is even less precise than yours.  However, I had
radiation, and am not expected to have an undetectable PSA by
ultrasensitive measures.  I've also seen significant PSA
"bounces" (rises followed by falls with no intervening
treatment).  For me, an ultrasensitive test would satisfy my
curiousity (or get me worried), but would have no effect on any
decision making.

After RP, I'm thinking the one big advantage of the
ultrasensitive test is that if you do see small rises, you can
schedule more frequent tests in order to be sure to spot any
bigger rise as quickly as possible after it happens.  However I'm
still not sure I'd want to do anything before .2, and maybe not
until .3 or .4.

I suggest you ask the uro about all this and let us know what he
says.

   Alan