|
| Spread_deMocracy wrote:
> Buford R. Sorry to hear of the problems you are having. By now
> you must have had a follow-up Cystoscopy? What did the doctor say? Since
> PVP merely burns a channel through the prostate, (and does not
> reduce the prostate), size of prostate is almost irrelevant, in my
> opinion.
I think you guys are missing something here. You can not burn a channel
through the prostate without removing prostate tissue - HUH!. The prostate
forms the urethra - i.e. the prostatic urethra is a channel, tube, pipe,
conduit (or whatever you want to call it), that runs through the prostate
gland. It's like drilling a whole through a baseball, or a chestnut (for
better size comparison). Just look at the chart on the wall the next time
you're at the uro's office (or google it). The same applies to the urethra
that extends through the penis. The urethra is not like a blood vessel in
your body, but is formed by a channel in the tissue that it is running
through (penis/prostate) and then the adjunct to the bladder neck.
Just thought I would try to clear that up...Pete
The urologist would clearly see that he has successfully[vbcol=seagreen]
> burned a channel right through to the bladder muscle...and that would
> mean you should have no problem urinating. So, I'd go see the
> urologist or, maybe to get a second opinion, a different urologist
> and determine the success of the "channel". You should not need to
> stay on FLOMAX. If for some reason your prostate immediately
> collapsed around the PVP channel and has immediately begun
> obstructing it, then you may need to go for a prostate reduction
> procedure...TURP. The prostate tends to be somewhat stubborn to
> treat since it kinda acts like clay and flows a bit after the
> surgery. Doctors need to be largely surgeon but part artist to get
> that right. Wishing you all the best.
> "Buford R via MedKB.com" <u5432@uwe> wrote in message
> news:56a462dbb79f9@uwe...
|
|