The ignorance of most urologists to PVP is par for the course. TURP works
but has undesirable side effects. PVP also works, has much fewer problems
(search past posts of this group through google) but is outside the
experience of all but a very small minority of UK urologists.

You can read plenty of first hand experiences of PVP on this group. I
strongly recommend you do so!

It is like this, before my first biopsy I was given an information sheet on
the procedure which said it was (I think I can remember the words
correctly!) "uncomfortable". The next time they wanted to do a biopsy, I
said I wanted an anaesthetic as I found it downright unpleasant. Again, I
got the explanation that it was not painful and I should go ahead without
the anaesthetic. My reply was: So, you've had a biopsy, have you? Of course
they hadn't (nor had the guy who wrote the information sheet) and I got my
anaesthetic!<G>

I strongly suggest you read past posts on this subject and do not get
bulldozed into something about which most urologists still know next to
nothing. They are quite right not to recommend something which is outside
their ken and encourage you to go with something that works. But on this
group you will meet those who were at the sharp end (!) and have actually
had a PVP. You will find their comments very encouraging indeed.

As for choosing a TURP just because it will yield tissue samples for a
biopsy, words associated with beef and manure spring to mind. If that was
such a good idea, why do most uros insist on a separate biopsy?

My PVP is scheduled for 7.30am on the 8th October 2003 and I expect to walk
out of hospital after the op in time for lunch. Try that after a TURP! (On
second thoughts, don't!).

Derry