Re: HIFU vs Open Surgery?


"Steph" <steph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:xVlAi.94703$fJ5.75774@xxxxxxxxxxxx


Thanks much for the information J. I have perused the BC Cancer Board
evaluation of HIFU and, although it was dated 2005 and perhaps things
have improved since, it was not particularly encouraging IMO. It seems
to be promoted mainly by the machine manufacturers (and is available in
Canada only in Toronto at private clinics). It sounds like I would be
eligible and I will mention it to my urologist but I doubt at this point
I'll try it.

OTOH I have had contact with some friends of a relative who have traveled
to the UCLA Medical Center for their prostate cancer surgery (radical
prostectomy. I have discussed it with one of them who told me the reason
he went was (this was 5 or 6 years ago) the waiting time here in Calgary.
His wait time for UCLA was 5 or 6 weeks which is about the time I will
have to wait here as well (I'm scheduled for Oct 05). The total cost
was about $30K apparently. So, it looks like I may as well just go with
what I have here (?).

Laurie Forbes


The nature of prostate cancer means that a 5 or 6 week wait is of no
consequence. I guess you've had a radiation oncology opinion too?

Thanks for mentioning that Steph (I was going to ask my urologist if in fact
a shorter wait would be beneficial).

I haven't spoken to a radiologist as my urologist/surgeon laid out four
treatments, those being open surgery, radiation, Bracyatherapy(sp) and
hormone. He discussed the relative pro/cons and I concluded that the
surgery was the best overall option even though it presents higher risk of
incontinence or impotence than some (all? )of the others. It is also my
impression that open surgery gives the best chance for (at least in my case)
cure although it the most invasive. Is radiation not normally employs as
first treatment when surgery is not an option (due to age, physical
condition etc)?

Laurie


.

Relevant Pages
Loading