Been taking combo of Flomax and dutasteride and I still have to get up numerous times. I want to get the green light laser treatment, but I have not found a doctor in the Portland Oregon area who does it, does anyone know of one?
Thanks
Lew, I hate to dissapoint you but Green light may not be a good procedure. So many people on this forums had them with not good outcomes.
How did you decide on GL ? Hank
Hank, Did my the PM's not convince you?
no, I do not know of a good one. I don't necessarily think it matters so much as I don't think that procedure works. Mine totally failed. I have a friend who had the same experience & I don't know of anyone who has had a succesful experience with the GL.
I was thinking about getting the full turp, but after reading a lot of comments on the forum I think I am not up for
the predicted pain, a likelihood of ongoing complications & outcome.
You have of course heard of Fake News:-)
I've PM'd you my GL experience from 2004,
Yes Derek. It did convince me that you did have a good GL. I never doubted that. I am also sure that many others did have good outcomes. Hank
Good for you to chime in Gordy. I can only speak from observation but you, you speak from experience. Hank
Researched for you from 6000 miles away.
Oregon Urology Clinic, P.C., 2222 N.W. Lovejoy, Suite 416, Portland, OR 97210 | 503.229.7722
So you think the bad outnumber the good from reading this Forum?
Why did your Uro say it failed and what did he do to improve the situation for you?
Green Light is TURP with laser. The long recovery and results are similar. It is hardly done anymore.
Lew: I reported yesterday that I had a GL in 2012. Prior to procedure my symptoms were reasonably "classic" BPH - frequent voiding during the day, then 4-6/nite, low volumes, dribbling, fullness feeling post void etc. My PSA was never above 3.3 during the previous 15 years so we didn't suspect a major cancer issue. Was on Flomax (or equivalent) for several years and it became less and less effective over time. Urogst suggested GL due to lesser complications than full blown TURP and a high success rate. Agreed to go ahead and procedure was uneventful. Sent home next day with catheter and instructed to remove cath next day which I did. As soon as I did, my voiding was essentially out of control. I had significant bladder spasming with concomitant voiding - averaged 25x/24 hour period (with a maximum of 45x one day) and it continued for approx ten weeks post GL. Urogst scripted several different antispasmodics which were ineffective, then performed a cysto and concluded that the GL was a "failed procedure". He determined that the GL process did not remove enough prostatic tissue to make a difference and actually exacerbated my symptoms - no kidding. My voids were usually 25 - 30ml/episode (never more than 50ml) and painful. He recommended a full TURP and I agreed since I was unwilling to continue with the constant urge/incontinence. That TURP corrected the post GL conditions though the healing process took several weeks.
Tissue harvested as a result of the TURP was sent to pathology for review. Findings revealed no lesions and were further determined to be reasonably dense (concentrated more so than the average case) which perhaps was less amenable to a GL protocol. Sorry, I'm unsure of the significance of dense tissue as a cellular and surgical matter. It does intuitively seem that attempting to vaporize a denser material with a laser might be more difficult than if that tissue is less dense. I now further understand that current GL equipment is more powerful than was the case 5 years ago. Higher wattage output at the laser probe tip enables more precise control and finer sculpting at the "work site". Generally, this likely means a higher percentage of successful outcome. Of course, each individual's case is unique and requires full consideration of all the variables by all interested parties.
One other detail that I discovered is that Medicare and some insurances reimburse the GL protocol at a higher rate than a TURP. Unsure of the reasoning behind this though, perhaps, could enter into some thinking about which protocol is recommended.
Anyways, FYI about my own experience with a GL procedure provided 5 years ago. No doubt others in the discussion group have other perspectives and a more positive report about their own experiences.
I am afraid so, Derek. Hank
Why do you want GreenLight? How did you get sold on that procedure and not something else to deal with Noctura? Please look for my other posts about my GL outcome before you leap into that. Please! Did your doctor mention doing CIC? And how old is your doctor? Have you had a urodynamics test and scan to determine the prostate size? Having had a total disaster from from my GL procedure, I just ask that you be cautious.
Thanks Glenn for chiming in. I re-read your post and it scared the h... out of me. It made me rethink seriously whether or not I would have any procedure, let alone GL. Hank
"It made me rethink seriously whether or not I would have any procedure, let alone GL."
And you are probably wise to think that way.
All procedures are opening a channel whether they use a hot wire or a laser. Laser seals off the blood vessels so less bleeding and quicker recovery
Source please of the statistics of GL hardly done any more.
Where is Kenneth our prophet of doom on all prostate procedures ? We have not heard from since Irma. As he lives in Orlando I hope he is OK.
What can I say?
GL is a more expensive procedure due to the cost of the laser rods although the hospital stay is much shorter . TURP just uses the same device over and over.