In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist (after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I should
or I should not? Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 21/03/2018 19:04, [email protected] wrote:

In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist (after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I

should or I should not? Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

On 21/03/2018 19:04, [email protected] wrote:

In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist

(after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of
the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was

very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the

only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder
or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm

apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read
mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I should or I should not?
Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

As far back as 1995 I turned down a TURP knowing of the likely

problems it would cause. I knew that laser surgery was in the pipeline
and waited for that. It was a long wait and I did not get GL PVP until
2004. Now there is a whole range of laser procedures and other treatments.
I'm in the UK but the information on this link if you plough through it
applies everywhere.
https://www.nice.org.uk/search?q=BPH
They all work for most people but there are exceptions. GL worked for me
and life was back to normal in three days. I don't know how many old
posts you managed to download as this site is little used now but I have
kept ones since 2003 and so have read of many successes and some failures. Patient.info a UK site is the most used site now but tends to be
inhabited by a group who pass on bad results or are fearful of any surgery. https://patient.info/forums/discuss/nice-prostate-article-links--645003
Good luck with the choice you make.
Derek

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 12:04:22 -0700 (PDT), "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist (after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I should

or I should not? Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

I had a TURP in 2009. Like you, I hesitated and postponed and devised
ways to live with my BPH condition. I considered PVP and consulted
more than one urologist. Several times I experienced complete blockage
and had to get unplugged at Emergency. I learned to self-catheterize.
All this to avoid a TURP.

At the time, the info I was getting was that PVP was much milder than
a TURP, because less prostatic tissue was removed. It gave relief but
required repeat surgery sooner. Less pain, less gain. PVP is just a
kind of TURP, using a laser instead of a knife.

A regular TURP is able to remove much more tissue because it is not
limited by the power of the laser. It is more drastic and may require
a longer hospital stay but it will be longer before it needs to be
redone. Maybe it will never need to be redone.

There are details that are important, and I don't remember them that
well any more... but they include things like bleeding and how that
relates to prostate size, irrigation of the tract during the procedure
and the possibility of shock because of absorption of the fluid, and
so on. These factors vary depending on whether the prostate tissue is
cut or burned.

Besides that, there is the matter of risk. Surgery carries a risk. The
greatest risks are bleeding and infection, but there is also a risk of
severing nerves and the consequences thereof.

But there is also a risk if you do nothing. Urinary retention can
severely stress the bladder and you might lose the elasticity, which
will cause problems every time you have to pee. I got yelled at by one
doctor after a retention episode. The doc warned me about the
consequences to the bladder. There is also a danger to the kidneys if
they have to put up with high pressure constantly.

I really like my kidneys, and also my bladder, so after some years of dithering, my fears of a TURP gave way to a fear of damaging my other
organs.

I went with the advice of my urologist, who is in the best position to
decide on the best measures to take. My prostate was big (150 g) and
he decided for TURP. The procedure went pretty well - quite a bit of
bleeding, but that was anticipated.

It's been 9 years now and I have no more symptoms. I'm cured. There is
no indication that another TURP will be needed in the foreseeable
future.

What you do depends on many things. Everybody is different. Read,
listen, consider... the most important info will probably come from
your urologist. Good luck with your decision!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 2:04:23 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist (after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I

should or I should not? Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

I did what the urologist was more comfortable with--I did a turp--was great---I have less energy--9 months later--but he says I will get more energy---I am glad i did it---no problems in the bathroom

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 3:04:23 PM UTC-4, [email protected] wrote:

In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist (after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I

should or I should not? Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

I have read that the holium laser can remove much more prostate tissue than PVP. Another new treatment is PAE (prostate artery embolism). A radiologist finds the arteries feeding the prostate and blocks them with micro-pellets, and the prostate then
shrinks. My partner just had this and is seeing results after a day or two. No surgery required, just the insertion of a catheter in your groin or wrist, so the radiologist can access your arteries. Only down side maybe the radiation from the
fluoroscope. An even more recent development is Aquablation. This procedure is TURP-like, but uses a high pressure water stream to remove the tissue, requiring no heat as do the lasers. It is robotic controlled in co-ordination with an MRI.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 2:04:23 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:

In a large Ontario Hospital I was told by an experienced urologist (after a cystoscopy) that I need to have a Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) due to my ongoing typical but very bad BPH symptoms.

During the cystoscopy the urologist could see that my prostate was very enlarged and was obstructing the urethra.

The urologist said I definitely needed a (TURP) and that it was the only way to solve my problem and possibly avoid future serious bladder or kidney problems that he said we're almost inevitable down the line.

The Urologist is very experienced though I am scared and I'm apprehensive about going through with the TURP surgery. I have read mainly negative stories about Post-TURP experiences. And now I'm very apprehensive about getting it I don't know if I

should or I should not? Can anyone who is had one give me any advice?

Hi
Your urologist forgot to mention the easiest, least invasive method to take the pressure off your bladder and kidneys: self-cathetering.

I've been self-cathetering for several months now...and it is a non-event. I actually LIKE it, because altho there is no pain when you retain too much, having the required equipment and knowledge to relieve that pressure whenever and wherever you wish...
gives a great sense of self-help and independence. And as that urine squirts out of the end of the catheter, somehow, somewhere, there is a sense of relaxation.

And the nice thing is that if you self-cath just before bedtime, you usually can sleep peacefully all night. No constant ups and downs! Bladder is relaxed; kidneys are fully drained; you're in dreamland to stay!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)