Archive for Surgery

NOTE: I ADDED INFORMATION TO THIS STORY AFTER I INITIALLY PUBLISHED IT.  PLEASE CONSIDER  THIS NEW INFORMATIONIT CAREFULLY.

The Wall Street Journal Health Blog entry today (Surgery for Prostate Cancer: Comparing Different Techniques, by Jacob Goldstein) concerns the results of a study recently reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association which compared the results of traditional, open radical prostatectomy (RP) with the newer minimally-invasive techniques such as laparascopic RP (LRP) and robotically assisted RP (RALP).

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/302/14/1557?home

The new study did not address the comparative rates of “oncological efficacy” (i.e. cancer control), as determined by the rates of positive post-surgical margins in the two groups. But previous studies have found that cancer control is *worse* in patients who have minimally invasive RP, *unless the surgery is performed by an exceptionally skilled laparascopic surgeon* — part of an elite clique who have at least 500 surgeries under their belt (no pun intended). Obviously, for a cancer patient, NOTHING is more important than the actual results of his surgery, regardless of the technique used.

CORRECTION: The study found that cancer control was the same in both groups.

With regard to side effects, the study found that minimally invasive surgery resulted in shorter hospital stays and fewer transfusions. But the researchers also found that patients who underwent LRP or RALP had a higher incidence of incontinence and impotence than those who had open surgery. I was aware of previous findings of more “urinary bother” in men who had had minimally invasive RP, but this study went *even further* by adding the ED results to the picture.

[ADDED]

The disparity in reported side effects of genitourinary problems, incontinence and impotence was dramatic: only 2% of traditional RP patients reported persistent side effects versus 5% of MIRP patients.

The researchers stressed that the men who had minimally invasive surgery tended to be of a higher socio-economic class, so perhaps the increased rate of reported side effects had something to do with higher expectations, or maybe it’s that people who are better off complain more.

[ADDED]

Interestingly, there were differences in outcomes based on geographical areas and ethnic groups.  In spite of the fact that black men were far less likely than whites or Asians to have minimally invasive surgery, the struggling city of Detroit was at or near the top of the list.   My guess is this is because a famous minimally invasive prostate cancer surgeon practices in the Motor City, and  the patients are mostly “medical tourists”.

The ultimate meaning of this is that, if RP is in your future, ALWAYS CHOOSE THE MOST EXPERIENCED SURGEON YOU HAVE ACCESS TO, ONE WHO HAS HIGH LEVELS OF PATIENT SATISFACTION, REGARDLESS OF TECHNIQUE. THAT’S HOW YOU WILL ACHIEVE THE BEST RESULT. As Dr. Arnon Krongrad, a well-regarded laparascopic RP surgeon who also founded the New Prostate Cancer Infolink (www.prostatecancerinfolink.net) wrote in this blog, “Find your Tiger Woods and don’t micromanage the clubs.” So if the most experienced surgeon in your area happens to use the open technique, do not despair — in the hands of a competent surgeon it’s not the barbaric picture that some partisans portray it to be. A day or two extra at the hospital, at most.

[ADDED]

BASED ON NEW INFORMATION, I RECOMMEND RECONSIDERING MINIMALLY INVASIVE RP UNTIL MORE OR BETTER INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE.

I know it’s hard to absorb the concept that the newest technology is not necessarily the best one for you. But as the authors of the above study put it, the adoption of the high-tech, minimally invasive approach to RP may just “be a reflection of a society and health care system enamored with new technology that . . . had yet to uniformly realize marketed or potential benefits during early adoption.”

To read the complete story from the WSJ blog, cut and paste the following URL:

http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2009/10/13/surgery-for-prostate-cancer-comparing-different-techniques/

I must say I found the following article in USA Today ( 4/1/09, by Liz Szabo) , bonechilling.  A British study confirms what I’ve said many times: that when it comes to performing minimally-invasive radical prostatectomy or laparoscopy (which includes robotically assisted surgery, *although that was not the subject of this study*),  NO amount of experience on the part of the surgeon is enough

And there is another very important point being made which I have NOT heard before:  That “open” surgeons  (those who perform the traditional radical retropubic prostatectomy) who later switch to laparascopic surgery produce (much) worse results than doctors who initially specialize in this area.

Here are some excerpts from the USA Today article (more comments at end):

“Prostate cancer patients whose surgeons have anything less than the highest degree of experience with a popular new procedure may be at greater risk of relapse, according to a study in The Lancet Oncology April 1 edition.

<snip> “While it takes at least 250 surgeries for a doctor to become proficient at the traditional surgery — allowing patients to feel confident that doctors removed all of the cancerous tissue — surgeons need to do at least 750 keyhole procedures to become proficient. Doctors who are used to performing traditional surgery actually have a harder time learning keyhole techniques than novice surgeons who are learning to perform the procedure for the first time, the study shows.

“That suggests that doctors shouldn’t try to switch back and forth between techniques, but instead focus on perfecting their skills on just one type of prostate removal and patients who opt for keyhole surgery should go to cancer centers where doctors specialize in the procedure, authors say.”

The take-home message for men who have decided on laparascopic prostatectomy but do not live near a top-rated urologic oncology facility (“Center of Excellence) is that they should consider traveling to one or finding a “high-volume” surgeon in private practice.  (For some guidance about top hospitals, look at usnews.com, “Rankings”, keyword “Cancer”, not Urology”.  Also, at castleconnolly.com, “America’s Top Doctors for Cancer”.)  A lot of people are unaware that there are charities which make arrangements for patients and their families to stay close to the hospital for the duration of treatment.   I know because I was on the receiving end of such a favor.  Ask the hospital social worker or chaplain about this.

Jul
31

Penile Rehab: “Pump & Circumstance”

Posted by: Leah | Comments (6)

Hi All, 

Over the past year I’ve done a lot of research on issues relating to sexual function after RP. I started out with this because my dear husband was rendered impotent by his surgery.  The doctor had given him the usual treatment: a prescription for Viagra, which we kept on renewing.

We watched and waited, and there was some progress, but not enough.  W knew it took time and were confident that the “miracle” would  happen tomorrow.  After 7 months had elapsed and dear husband was still unable to function, we called the surgeon, who referred us to an ED doctor who was a colleague of his.  Anyway, the doc didn’t work out.  After three months he hadn’t even finished the “testing.”

I was fed up with all of this, so I decided to look for a competent impotence specialist on my own.  I remember spending 3 hours in the library reading Castle Connolly’s Metro NY Top Doctors book. But it worked:  I got some good prospects. DH went to see two doctors, and the second one turned out to be just right.  His name is Arnold Melman, and he is a world-renowned expert on ED.  He has written many books, including one on Viagra. And he was pleasant and unpretentious.

We found out from Dr. Melman that a lot of men who have RP are not given optimal treatment afterwords to help them function sexually or prevent long-term ED.  He also said that the benefits of nerve-sparing RP were exaggerated.  I felt that I was privileged to have access to a doctor of this caliber, and so I wanted to share what I had learned with the public. The first thing Dr. Melman told Ted was: 

“You don’t need the Viagra [in his case, because it wasn't working].  You’re just giving a gift to the drug company.”  

Anyway, this doc gave us some good ”insider” advice, which I decided to share.  My first post on this subject, Sex After Surgery” was written back in November 2006. I try to keep up with the research. 

I will be discussing “penile rehabilitation” a lot and also impotence after RP in general.  I want to share with you something I wrote today in response to a question about using a pump (VED) after RP:

It’s no secret that many men suffer from impotence after RP.  It’s hard to pin down the actual numbers, because they play games with the statistics.  For example, how do you define “erectile function?”  Let me count the ways.  Does it include men who can have intercourse unaided, or only with meds.  And just how hard does the tumescence have to be? You get the picture.

On the other hand, there *are* men have no problems with erections after surgery — take the surgeon, for example (:-).  Other guys are able to function sexually using Viagra or other oral meds.   This message is directed towards men who have not had success with the above. 

There are two issues involved in “penile rehabilitation”:

(1) enabling a man to have an erection after surgery

(2) helping to speed up or restore natural erectile function,  thereby preventing long-term ED.

  I am talking about second topic here.

If you are unable to have intercourse after two months, you should see an ED doctor.  (For help in finding a competent one, see my post on “Sexy Secrets For Finding An ED Doctor.”)

There’s a lot we don’t know about penile rehab, but the best prospects at this moment appear to be *injections* along with Viagra.  The following is from Dr, Raina et al, renowned experts on ED:

“Early cavernosal injections following RP facilitated sexual intercourse, patient satisfaction and potentially early return of natural erections. Early combination therapy with sildenafil allowed a lower dose of intracavernous injections, minimizing the penile discomfort.”

www.nature.com/ijir/journal/v18/n5/abs/3901448a.html.

*Note that there is no mention of the VED (pump).

So why are so many guys told to use the pump after RP?  Makes me want to jump out the window. 

Here is an example of the “gold standard” in penile rehab today.  A *top* expert in sexual medicine at Sloan Kettering, Dr.John Mulhall, prescribed this for a new RP patient recently:

====>Re:  *Before Surgery*

Six weeks before surgery, the patient was advised to take 25 mgs. of Viagra six nights a week, to be taken before bed (a 100 mg. pill cut in fourths to save money) to increase blood flow to the penis prior to the operation.

======> Re: *After Surgery*

*Dr. Mulhall and his associate Dr. Nelson Eddie Bennett, Jr., both made it clear that they saw no benefit in using a vacuum erection device (VED) after RP for penile rehab because it only “circulated old blood” to the penis*

Scardino says the same thing on page 366 of “The Prostate Book”:

“VED’s do not produce an actual physiological erection and therefore don’t promote the circulation of fresh, oxygenated blood.   Therefore, they may not help avoid fibrosis [scarring] after radical prostatectomy.”

So even if the VED doesn’t work for penile rehab, most men are told to use it anyway, with or without pills.  No mention of injections (I call it “the Pinprick.”) 

I have seen info in the medical lit which says that the pump *does* work for penile rehab, but they do not point to specifics. And, in the last few days, I have *again* reviewed all the articles I have on this subject, and I have not seen any proof of the above.  My husband is from the “Show Me” state, so I gotta see the “beef.”

I do know of one knowledgeable person online who is the moderator of a newsgroup but certainly not a doctor, who described state-of-the-art treatment for penile rehab as injections plus oral meds *and the use of the pump 15 minutes a day.”  I doubt there is any harm in using the pump and it can give you an erection. 

Ideally, injection therapy should start about six weeks after RP.  Naturally, men don’t like the prospect of shooting up there, but you *can* get over it.  Give yourself a chance.  Also, you can have a sex life right away.  (For more info, see the post on my blog, “How I Became the Trimix Lady.”.) 

I have to add that there is a risk of scarring or “fibrosis” from using penile injections. Some men get “Peyronie’s Disease,” which results in curvature of the penis. They say this is rare, but I don’t believe it.  In my husband’s case, after about 8 mongh,. his penis started to bend in the middle at a 45 degree angle.  I guess the advantage is that you can fold it easily :-) .  (Husb has refused to consult his ED doc about this)

*So you have to be careful of how you inject — do it on both sides.  (I will be posting specifics about this.)

A final note: I have no medical training at all.  So you should ask an ED doctor about all this just to be sure.

And just for fun:

 This is my favorite story in the world: how I came up with the word “pinprick” as a substitute for “injection”.  I was looking for a way  to convey to guys that shots for ED aren’t so bad after all.  So I told them the injection is just a “pinprick, no big deal. I think it worked for some people.

What made me think of this word?

When I got engaged to my husband, the first thing we did was call both of our parents to tell them the news.  We conferenced everybody in on the same line.

The first question my very devout mother asked after they were introduced was: “Did your son have a “Bris?” In other words, was he circumcised?  Great way to get acquainted.  (I never heard the end of that.)

His stepmother replied after a pause, “I think so, but it was done by a doctor, not in any ritual way. Isn’t that right, Chuck?”

Well, my mother wasn’t satisfied with this.  She insisted that Ted had to be circumcised *properly.*  So I asked her, “How can a man be circumcised twice?”

She replied, “It’s no big deal — just a ceremonial thing.  All they’ll do is give him a ‘pinprick’.   And maybe recite a blessing.  Then we’ll all have a little celebration.”

Anyway, T. wasn’t interested in having a “circumcision party,” and he refused to get it done, even for me.  Just to get my mother off my back. 

And that’s probably why he got the PC — measure for measure.  Ted had refused the “pinprick”  then, and now he’s getting pricked all the time

My mother always gets her way.

Best to you all and have fun.

All you need to know about PC: Get It From a Wife!