Once again the mainstream media misses the mark. The focus of the NYT article is about surgery type & costs, when the overiding considerations for any patient should be on SKILL and EXPERIENCE of the surgeons under consideration. That was, in fact, the theme if not the conclusion of the article published by Dr Hu last Oct (less than a wk before he performed my DaVinci RRP). Full text can be found at:
Of course determining experience is the easier of the two. Surgeons I interviewed all gave pretty specific and varied answers to how many RP's they'd performed, over how many years, etc. But they all answered the to me more critical skill question (i.e. cancer eradication) pretty similarly, something like "oh,.. in the 90%'s,... same as everybody else"). Vague at best.
Sure would be nice if there was a more objective way for prospective patients to determine success rates, but privacy issues stand in the way I guess.
DX age 56
biopsy Aug 09 gleason 3+3=6; T1C; 2 of 12 cores (40%/50%)
RRP 10/20/09, B&W/Faulkner Boston, Dr Jim Hu
path report gleason 3+4=7; T2C NX MX; 1.9 cm & 10%
perineural invasion present
lymphatic invasion present
margins & seminal vesicles negative
lymph nodes not tested
post op psa 11/23/09 - 0.0!
no incontinence after cath removal (confidence pads for 1 wk)
ED complete so far (but some signs of life)