New Club Member

Gee folks, must be something in the water, today.

We have been critical of DavidG regarding his posts extolling the virtues of a certain surgeon, mainly due to a history of such spam-type posts. This time, that was not the case.

He gave a good, reasoned post and now you guys are trying to jump all over him by nit-picking.

Give it a break.

In answer to the original poster:

I did a lot of research when I was dx. I did prefer the robotic due to the quicker recovery. However, by FAR the overriding consideration was the skill/experience of the surgeon. I ended up narrowing it down to two and consulted with both. I eventually chose one who is one of the best robotic surgeons around. However, if he did open surgery I still would have picked him. In other words, it's the surgeon, not open vs. robotics that counts.

Mel

compiler said...
Gee folks, must be something in the water, today.


We have been critical of DavidG regarding his posts extolling the virtues of a certain surgeon, mainly due to a history of such spam-type posts. This time, that was not the case.



He gave a good, reasoned post and now you guys are trying to jump all over him by nit-picking.



Give it a break.



In answer to the original poster:



I did a lot of research when I was dx. I did prefer the robotic due to the quicker recovery. However, by FAR the overriding consideration was the skill/experience of the surgeon. I ended up narrowing it down to two and consulted with both. I eventually chose one who is one of the best robotic surgeons around. However, if he did open surgery I still would have picked him. In other words, it's the surgeon, not open vs. robotics that counts.



Mel

Doesn't matter, I cannot see those posts. Although I have no idea what could possibly be attacked or deconstructed based on what I wrote here.

I agree, we want the best in our field regardless of the field. If every surgeon I came across was a dog I would have found someone good at radiation.

That I found someone who is great at doing the procedure that was my preference was a HUGE releief to me during those very dark days.

I seemed to turn a corner when I decided what to do, with whom, and when. It was like the second phase of my battle.

I saw yours.

I would consider you 100%.

I don't have the squirts anymore.

before surgery when I was having urinary issues I would have to shake it out a lot to get everything out. Inevitably after pulling up pants a drop or two might have come out. I used to sit to pee sometimes to make it more effective. That was more than I have now post op and I never sit now.

Surgery and radiation are likely to have roughly equivalent results in a case like yours, assuming that in each case they are done by highly experienced specialists. So choosing the best doc within the treatment type you select is more important than choosing one treatment type over another.

You might want to consult with Dr. Mark Scholz in Marina Del Rey. Since he is a medical oncologist specializing in prostate he does not have an axe to grind one way or another between surgery and radiation.

That said, your situation involves faster growth rate than usual. In my mind, that gives and edge to surgery because there is the pathology report to tell you exactly what's going on in there. So if the path report finds things that are troubling you can move right to adjuvant therapy. Whereas if you go the radiation route, you will not have the additional information to assess the situation and find out if adjuvant is needed. So my recommendation would be to talk to both surgical and radiation specialists to get different opinions but if is a draw, then I would go the surgery route.

I agree with the 1000 number if at all possible. As the years pass more and more and more surgeons will have such numbers making the decision easier for patients who as of now might need to travel to find docs with such numbers.