 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / May 2008Still incontinent 10 months after prostatectomy.
Hi, I'm rather concerned because I'm still incontinent 10 months after having a RP by Da Vinci robotic surgery in London, back in July 2007. The RP operation in itself appears to have been successful because all three of my PSA tests done at 3 month intervals since the op have come back as 'undetectable'. Here's my background: After the operation I had a few complications with urine retention when the first catheter was removed a week later and, as a result, I was re-catheterised for another two or three weeks. Once free of the catheter I needed to use three or four pads every day and now, 10 months on, nothing much has changed - leakage -wise - except that I am pleased to say that I'm now quite dry overnight. I'm doing the Kegel exercises every morning and evening, as well as a couple of times during the day, but they don't seem to be helping much because even now I'm still wetting pads when walking, climbing stairs and generally moving around. When I saw the consultant last week he said that if my situation hadn't improved when he next saw me in July (12 months after the op) he would then propose further positive action. He mentioned another operation to fit a 'valve' which, he said, would cure the problem, but I'm not too happy about the idea of any further invasive surgery (I'm 67). Am I expecting too much to be dry at 10 months? Is it sensible to consider further surgery to cure the problem? Are there any other techniques that I can use to help the situation? I'd be really interested to hear the views and experiences of others who may have been in my situation. Thanks in anticipation, - Dave  SignatureDavid C.Chapman - (dcchapman@minda.co.uk) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Am I expecting too much to be dry at 10 months? *Expecting*? I think so. Statistics place you and me on the damp side of norm, but VA incontinence experts -- professionals who have devoted their careers to it -- told me you (and I) are the norm at 2-3 pads a day. Either way, we'd rather be dry, and many are, but *expecting* it defies both the statistics and those professionals (both of whom lecture nationally on the topic). > Is it sensible to consider further surgery to cure the problem? Not in my book. No way in hell I'm going to risk complications just so I *might* change pads only once a day rather than 1-4 ties a day. > Are there any other techniques that I can use to help the situation? Well, we could sit or lie all day and stay dry. Or we can get on with our lives and change pads when necessary. I sit down only to eat, drive, or read; the rest of the day, including this very minute, I'm standing or walking or exercising. If I'm changing pads and exercising for another 30 years, I'll be overjoyed. I.P. >*Expecting*? I think so. Statistics place you and me on the damp side of >norm, but VA incontinence experts -- professionals who have devoted >their careers to it -- told me you (and I) are the norm at 2-3 pads a >day A 2 minute google search falsifies the above. >>*Expecting*? I think so. Statistics place you and me on the damp side of >>norm, but VA incontinence experts -- professionals who have devoted >>their careers to it -- told me you (and I) are the norm at 2-3 pads a >>day > > A 2 minute google search falsifies the above. I doubt what the VA docs told I.P. is on Google. :-) >>>*Expecting*? I think so.Statistics place you and me on the damp side of >>norm, but VA incontinence experts -- professionals who have devoted [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >I doubt what the VA docs told I.P. is on Google. :-) "Statistics place you and me on the damp side of norm" Statistics? Damp side? > "Statistics place you and me on the damp side of norm" > > Statistics? Damp side? Concur. But, statistics have me on the dead side of norm and I'm very alive. It's a good trade. >> "Statistics place you and me on the damp side of norm" >> >> Statistics? Damp side? > > Concur. But, statistics have me on the dead side of norm and I'm very > alive. It's a good trade. Statistics -- and your presence here -- place you on the live side of norm. i.e., statistically, you should be dead and I should be drier. I.P. Very many thanks to those who replied to my posting for their comments and suggestions, both through the NG and privately. I certainly never realised what a controversial subject it was until I saw how many widely differing opinions were being offered. I've now got quite a lot to think about. What a useful NG this is. All the best, and thanks once again. - Dave SignatureDavid C.Chapman - (dcchapman@minda.co.uk) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Very many thanks to those who replied to my posting for their > comments and suggestions, both through the NG and privately. Ya gotta watch those private communications. I always wonder about advice or anecdotes or data not subjected to public scrutiny. I.P. >> "Statistics place you and me on the damp side of norm" >> >> Statistics? Damp side? > >Concur. But, statistics have me on the dead side of norm and I'm very >alive. It's a good trade. That's great, Steve, and there's no dispute about this, the specific need not, sometimes cannot (2.3 children per family etc), match the generality. But if it's worth saying at all, the generality needs to be as meaningful and unambiguous as possible. If it says nothing, it says nothing. WRT the post-RP incontinence discussion in this forum, terms like 'dry' 'wet' 'damp' and 'norm' have been left vague, made to self-contradict, defined to suit a conclusion, used, abused and cooked up into a porridge of total nonsense. Nobody is swallowing it, but it continues to be served up. > Am I expecting too much to be dry at 10 months? Is it sensible to > consider further surgery to cure the problem? Are there any other > techniques that I can use to help the situation? Good to see you back, Dave. And good to see your PSA is undetectable at 9 months. I would say you are not expecting too much at 10 months. It should have come back to you by now I think. As to further surgery, that's a personal judgment. Surgery is about 2/3rds successful, as I understand it. It depends, I think, on what you do in life and just how irritating leakage is. I was fairly continent after a few months and lost it with RT and ADT. It causes me no problem except when I exert myself. As a matter of fact, I'm sitting here on a lazy Sunday without a pad. But, if my wife wants me to pick up those 40 pound bags of humis and manure for her Mother's Day flowers, I'm going to put on a pad. SignaturePSA 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 PSAD 0.19 years EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years Casodex added daily 07/06 PSA <0.04, <0.05, <0.04, <0.04, <0.1 2/12/08 Non Illegitimi Carborundum > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > consider further surgery to cure the problem? Are there any other > techniques that I can use to help the situation? According to Patrick Walsh, half the patients who have had radical prostatectomies at Johns Hopkins report not needing pads by three months, 80 percent at 6 months, 90 to 93 percent at one year and 93 to 95 at two years. Men are considered incontinent if they wear one or more pads daily even if they just drip. Peter Scardino reports that only one percet of his patients are incontinent by one year. of course these men are first rate surgeons (but the Hopkins figures refer to all surgeons there, not just to Walsh), and an average surgeon may not do so well. But my surgeon said the risk of permanent long time incontinence would be at most about 20 percent. Here is was including minor stress incontinence, and not defining it in terms of pads. I've seen similar statistics quoted by others. Supposedly, the risk of incontinence is less for robotic surgery. I think there must be something special going on in your case. Walsh comments elsewhere that men who've had problems with urination before RP are more likely to have problems with continence afterwards. You do say that something appeared to have gone wrong in your case. I think you have to play this by ear. Wait and see if things start to approve. Bu t eventually you may have to make a decsion about further surgery. > I'd be really interested to hear the views and experiences of others > who may have been in my situation. > > Thanks in anticipation, > > - Dave <snip> > But my surgeon said the risk of permanent long time incontinence >would be at most about 20 percent. = the result of a.s.c.p.'s straw poll.....80% pad free.
|
Reply to this Message |
 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.