 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate BPH / March 2005Greater than 50,000 PVPs done worldwide
I think it is amazing to watch how fast this technology is becoming mainstream in the treatment of BPH. At the end of December 2004, the worldwide installed base of Laserscope PVP GreenLight laser systems exceeded 400 systems, and fiber sales since Laserscope introduced the PVP procedure in 2002 have been over 54,000. I had one of the first PVPs in June of 2002 and still going strong nearly 3 years later. Patrick >I think it is amazing to watch how fast this technology is becoming >mainstream in the treatment of BPH. At the end of December 2004, the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Patrick Hello Patrick, The problems people ( including me ) have had after PVP are largely related to prostate size over 100g . This is a category that was hardly ever attempted by TURP. The fact that we are now being treated without open surgery is as remarkable as the evident replacement of the TURP with PVP for the mainstream operation with the "classic " walk in walk out scenario. The experience of some of the +100g group is not quite so rosy,either short or long term. We are all indebted to the pioneers like youself for promoting the procedure and letting us all know the good news. Richie Richie, You are absolutely correct, the PVP makes 100g+ treatable. I was in the large prostate club and was fortunate to get the PVP when I did. What is remarkable is that the number of 100g+ being treated with PVP. There is a separate body of research in this area as well as separate studies of the outcomes. You are right, the outcomes of the 100g+ cases will be much more variability but at least they can be treated without the need for an open prosectomy. I am glad to be free of BPH now for about three years and I am very happy that many many others have seen relief as well because of the wider and wider availability of PVP. Take care and best wishes for good health. Patrick >>I think it is amazing to watch how fast this technology is becoming >>mainstream in the treatment of BPH. At the end of December 2004, the [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Richie Patrick: And I am glad that you are continuing to contribute here!!! Mel > Richie, > You are absolutely correct, the PVP makes 100g+ treatable. I was in the [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >> >> Richie Hi All As you can see from my March 5th post I was at 150 grams in size. A Uro saw me in the ER and said I would have been better off with a TURP or really an Open because of the size of prostate. He said the problems I was having is common with a large prostate and the PVP. I have been reading this site for a long time and do not remember reading much about problems with large prostates. I think it would be a good thing if some of the information on large prostate problems would show up for others to read. Since the surgery I have seen close to $4000.00 in ER charges for my 4 midnight trip to get help when I could not go. I sure hope the insurance company does not get upset with me. Bill > Richie, > You are absolutely correct, the PVP makes 100g+ treatable. I was in the [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > > > Richie Hello Bill, To put our large prostate PVP problems in perspective,just type "turp syndrome" in Google,and you will find a lot of really scary information on this complication of the TURP procedure. Turp syndrome does not occur with PVP. In brief it is caused by many factors,one being lengthy procedure usually caused by a large (defined as over 30g ! ) prostate.I think this is why 100g is seen as the upper limit for TURP. Turp syndrome is caused by bodily absorption of the irrigating fluid, and can be fatal. You can then see why open surgery was the preferred option for a large prostate, before PVP Open surgery is a major procedure with risks of it's own,as the prostate is quite hard to get to. At least with PVP your chances of dying or becoming incontinent or impotent are remote. Retro,post op clotting,bleeding,and other temporary unpleasant things...for 100g + ,maybe All the best, Richie >Hi All> >As you can see from my March 5th post I was at 150 grams in size. A Uro saw [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] >> > >> > Richie >Hi All > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >help when I could not go. I sure hope the insurance company does not get >upset with me. I too have a 150 gram prostate, and I still have all of it. Am considering a PVP. Regarding visits to emergency for acute retention, have you thought about self-catheterization? My experience is that at emergency, they wait a couple of hours even when they are not that busy, and by that time the bladder is so full, I am in pain, having bladder spasms and blood vessels are bursting. There is a chance of over-stretching the bladder muscles, and this (I understand) can be permanent, or at least long-lasting. Now I self-catheterize. (Just for emergency situations, I mean.) Much faster, and no blood. I find I can do it just as well (if not better) than the folks at emergency. Talking to one of the people at a PVP urologist's office, I asked if I would be able to self-catheterize after a PVP... because there is a good chance that I will have episodes of retention after the procedure. Answer was that that should work fine. Ed After my first PVP, My surgeon couldn't even catheterize me to do urodynamic testing - before my 2nd PVP. He didn't know why it didn't get in the bladder, though he tried about 4 or 5 different catheters. [He even tried unsuccessfully to thread it in with a cystoscope]. I haven't tried since my second PVP (Dec. '03). An unsolved mystery. Ron > From: Ed <Ed@Hatespam.com> > Organization: Shaw Residential Internet > Newsgroups: sci.med.prostate.bph > Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 17:31:17 GMT > Subject: Re: Greater than 50,000 PVPs done worldwide >... Talking to one of the people at a PVP urologist's office, I asked if I > would be able to self-catheterize after a PVP... because there is a > good chance that I will have episodes of retention after the > procedure. Answer was that that should work fine... > Ed >After my first PVP, My surgeon couldn't even catheterize me to do urodynamic >testing - before my 2nd PVP. He didn't know why it didn't get in the >bladder, though he tried about 4 or 5 different catheters. [He even tried >unsuccessfully to thread it in with a cystoscope]. I haven't tried since my >second PVP (Dec. '03). An unsolved mystery. >Ron Sounds like bad news. How did they eventually drain you off? Ed Ed, As I said, the purpose was to do urodynamic testing, (not to drain me off). He was never able to do those tests prior to the second PVP. He did them before my first PVP. Between the 2 PVPs, I was afraid to go to an emergency room, because to catheterize me would require special skill, and knowlege of my condition - false channel etc. I don't have more particulars about my condition at the time. Sorry. Ron > From: Ed <Ed@Hatespam.com> > Organization: Shaw Residential Internet [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Ed Hi Ed When I go to the ER Urinary Retention is a top priority with them. It takes less than a half hour for relief. I have been there so much they all know me!!! I must admit it would be good to learn how to do it myself. If the bladder is full of clots they also have to be flushed out or the catheter plugs up. I had that happen once when they did not get them all out. Bill > >Hi All > > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Ed I had my first of 2 PVP's (very large prostate) Oct. of '02. Though I had lots of PVP related difficulties (posted about previously), I'm now glad that I went that way - good flow, no problems these days. Thanks again to Patrick the pioneer, for spreading the word. Ron > From: "TAP" <1LCrestview@comcast.net> > Newsgroups: sci.med.prostate.bph [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Patrick |
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.