This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
I had the same problem after my robotic surgery. My PSA was slowly rising so the surgeon ordered many tests (CAT scan, bone scan and a prostascint scan), all of which came up negative. After a year, another doctor (a hematology oncologist) ordered a transrectal MRI that showed half of my prostate still in place. The surgeon claimed it was a "surgical mishap". I had to go through a full course of hormone therapy and radiation. My PSA continued to go up for another year or so before it started to go down.
As a matter of interest did you seek, or were you offered, any recompense for the 'medical mishap'? It seems to me that the event might be categorised by someone other than the surgeon as 'medical malpractice'!
Sounds as if all was well in the end which must have been a relief to you I am sure.
I was not offered any compensation. In fact, neither the hospital nor the surgeon wanted to talk about it other than to say that it sometimes happens. I met with a malpractice lawyer and he didn't want to take the case because he felt it would be too hard to prove.
Paul, that is appalling and lends support to the view I have long held that the concern expressed by insurers and doctors about the high risk of being sued to justify their very high charges and the plethora of tests they order - often from suppliers in which they have a financial interest.