radical prostatectomy and 'penile shrinkage'

The litmus test

I should note that the urologist i settled on told me about side effects, but not about the shortening length. However, he did encourage me to consult with other post-op Davinci patients. I did not need to do this because my friend had pretty much told me his previous experience, and I went in to RP expecting i may never have sex again... but in my condition at the time, sex was a distant memory, and my other issues were more prevalent than ED.

So I think THIS is the litmus test:

Is your urologist giving you a wide range of treatments, noting side effects for each one, treatment outcomes, frequency of successful treatments, quality of life post-op, and how your own variables can influence those outcomes, such as pre-op length, age, frequency of sexual activity, etc?

OR

Is the urologist making all your decisions FOR you? Are you being steered toward a certain direction? Are you getting the "next in line" surgeon just because he belongs to the same clinic as your urologist?

There it is. We can argue all day about anecdotal outcomes. Is it any wonder so many of us depend on VdG's advice? Excluding the surgeon/urologist, my success rate for the  above litmus test was only 20%! Only one in five gave me all the information about five different procedures, their side effects, and outcomes. How is that possible? Only one in five gave me enough information to make my own decisions, instead of making the decisions FOR me.

 

I have had no surgery, wasn't

I have had no surgery, wasn't dx until i had stage 4 metastatic prostate cancer.. I take lupron to lower my testosterone + i am 80 years old.. so, i can only say if your lucky enough to live as long as me i assure you your penis will shrink.. Sorry...

litigation

I am NO fan of litigation, but if urologists continue to hide side effects, especially penile shortening, arent they opening themselves up to malpractice suits? If I was their liability insurance company, i would insist they tell RP patients up front that they will suffer a loss of 2" , and if they cant afford to lose that then they need to know... there's hordes of medical malpractice attorneys itching to sue the hospital, the urologist, the surgeon etc. And if someone can stand to endure several years of courtroom litigation talking about the shortened length of his business and how it ruined his QoL, he would stand to make a law firm very wealthy. (He wont see much of it though). 

Better just to tell the patient upfront as standard procedure.

I dont know anything about the law, but i am familiar with liability in our business. You dont mess around when it comes to liability protection, and procedures adjustments. That's why we are a limited liability corporation.

Ive seen successful cases of liability that were a lot less convictive than loss of QoL from shortening.

Scam

I read on other forums  about this scam going around for 10 years praying on prostate Ca patiemnts.

BEWARE!!!!!!!

MK