DOS procedure for BPH

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Norman - 23 Aug 2006 16:55 GMT

I have just seen an ad in the NY newspaper NEWSDAY on which I would like any
feedback you may have. I will quote the ad exactly as is. "Dose Optimized
Thermotherapy (DOS) is a new, nonsurgical FDA approved treatment that offers
effective relief of many urinary symptoms such as frequency, urgency,
incontinence and decreased force of stream. Thermotherapy uses heat to
destroy enlarged prostate tissue so that it does not squeeze the urethra. It
is a simple procedure to restore normal urination without having to take
medications such as Hytrin, Cardura and Flomax. It is one of the safest and
most advanced treatment options available for enlarged prostate where a
single treatment provides long lasting symptom relief, says Dr. J. Francois
Eid, clinical associate professor of urology at Weill Cornell Medical
College, Manhattan. Thermatrx is covered by most major medical insurance and
the treatment does not require a visit to the hospital."
Does anyone have any info about this procedure or the doctor?
Thanks for any help.
Norm.

Reply to this Message

Chockman - 23 Aug 2006 19:47 GMT

Take a look at TherMatrx.com for additional information. This is
another variation of the TUMT (trans urethral microwave therapy)
procedures such as Prostatron and Targis. I had the Prostatron
treatment 7/2/04 and then went back with the PVP 2/23/05. The TUMT
failed to clear the whole prostatic urethra. The outcome from the TUMT
seemed to only be partial and certainly the recovery from the TUMT was
far more difficult that from the PVP. The only regret fromt he PVP was
the retro that resulted. At 78 weeks the retro is still evident.

> I have just seen an ad in the NY newspaper NEWSDAY on which I would like any
> feedback you may have. I will quote the ad exactly as is. "Dose Optimized
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> Thanks for any help.
> Norm.

Reply to this Message

Salmon Egg - 23 Aug 2006 19:58 GMT

On 8/23/06 8:55 AM, in article C111F298.66521%normanwt@optonline.net,

I have had TUMT twice with poor results. Why should I expect this current
reincarnation of the method to be more effective. Unfortunately, physicians
pitching new therapies may have some vested interests other than doing best
for their patients.

Bill
-- Ferme le Bush

Reply to this Message

Rich256 - 23 Aug 2006 23:06 GMT

> On 8/23/06 8:55 AM, in article C111F298.66521%normanwt@optonline.net,
>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> Bill
> -- Ferme le Bush

Apparently it does work for some. I have heard success of anything from
50% to 85%. But it didn't do much for me. And as Chockman said
recovery took longer than PVP. I wonder why. I had a catheter for 5
days after TUMT. Overnight for PVP and many don't have one at all.

And of course PVP is a lot more expensive so insurance will try to avoid
it if possible.

However, the 2nd night after PVP I was beginning to think I would have
to have the catheter put back in. Rather frequency, painful and
extremely slow urination. It took me minutes to get out an ounce. But
by the next morning the flow was at least back to where it was before
the PVP. Then continuous improvement for the next several weeks. And
as most full retro.

So if an individual want to try to avoid retro, there is not a lot to
lose, except a bit more pain and more delay, by trying TUMT but don't
expect marvelous results.

Reply to this Message