BPH

[omajoy]

If you read my previous posts on behalf of my spouse, you will see the continued plea for responses related to potential harm done by prostiva (TUNA) procedure. He had this done last November of 2007. Today, July 4, 2008, we are still in trouble. Urination constant with no rest at night, burning sensation, pain, every negative thing one would NOT want. We have no life. Going to the grocery or the library with always a bathroom visit during it is the extent of our outings. His current urologist has essentially written him off; this is, by the way, urologist #3, in the quest for help. This guy says he doesn't believe the bi-lateral kidney stones (his kidneys are packed with large stones) is causing the problem, which began with prostiva. He says "come back in two months" and if in the interim you want to, seek more opinion. Well, what is the point? More cystoscopes, more medication trials, more testing, more CT's....to the point where Medicare must be alarmed and our private carrier cringing to see more duplicate procedures being billed. I want to go kicking and screaming to urologist #1 who pushed him into the prostiva in the first place. I am so sure this guy damaged my spouse I would place bets in Vegas on the odds. The urology community, even in our very large urban area, are all in "cahoots" with one another...have shared large practices where 1 1/2 hour waits to see your doctor are not unusual. There are probably 4 large practices in our area and all these guys have practiced together at one time or another. They form a very close-knit fraternity and would never admit to error. The lowly family physician (more power to those hard-working physicians) says: "well, now you know...if it ain't broke, don't fix it"....meaning that my spouse's problem was not severe enough to take the drastic step of prostiva just so he could continue to ride his bike hours a day. Urologist #1 was also a triathalon athelete, so he was quite adamant that prostiva was the answer to my spouse's complaints of some irritation, some hesitancy in urination, some enlargement of the prostate but not huge. I am totally upset and disgusted with this. Our life is essentially over as we once knew it. If you think something like this doesn't affect a marriage, give it a go. Emotionally and physically, the damage is huge. A good attorney is looking better and better. A good public litigation wouldn't bring back my spouse to his once strong place, but it would justify my feelings that someone is at fault here and should admit it and face the consequences.

[gott1936]

Omajoy, how old is your spouse? I am not a medical professional, but due to my own problems I have done extensive research on invasive urology procedures. At least, as much as a layman can. All of these procedures can have post-operative complications. The proficiency of the urologist and the condition of the patients urinary system,etc. can determine the results of any invasive surgical procedure. TUNA is suppose to have an overall incidence of post-operative complications than other more invasive urology procedures.

[omajoy]

My husband was 67 in June. He was in what we considered to be above average health when he agreed to the procedure. From your post I was confused as to the final line. Was it to say that TUNA had what is considered to be "low" post-operative? Meaning not many negatives??? It is just that the on-set of my husband's problems coincided with the procedure. Prior to it he had already had kidney stone surgery about 16 years ago and has had urinary tract infections over the years. It was one of these that got him to a urologist in November...to see if there was something to be done about his periodic infections. He needs bi-lateral kidney stone surgery, the only thing which hasn't been addressed in this illness. As I said, his current doctor doesn't think the stones are the cause of his urgency, discomfort, and overall situation he is now in. But this doctor conceded that "others might disagree with this opinion." Thanks for your input.

[gott1936]

Sorry for the confusion. Yes, TUNA is supposed to have a lower rate of post-operative complications.

[omajoy]

gott1936, thanks for your clarification. We, too, felt from the dialogue with urologist and the printed information and CD given prior to TUNA, that the possiblity of complications were very low. Thus he went ahead with it. And now has been sick ever since. We are very confused and disappointed and unable to live life. Complicating this, I was under cancer treatment for sarcoma for over a year and as of June, have new cells in lung which must be addressed. Two of us ill makes for serious situation. We are hoping for some miraculous turn around in his situation so that he will feel well enough to deal with me and my situation which will escalate as of next week. I don't see it happening since he has suffered since November 2007. But appreciate any and all opinion we can get from any source. Thanks for taking your time to communicate.