Facing some choices....
I often have significant urinary retention issues tied to chronic prostatitis. Had thought for years that it was BPH, and was even told so by the first Uro doc I wqas seeing for 3 years. Prostate is somewhere between 44 mL and 55 mL depending on whether you believe the ultrasound or my last MRI - MRI said 44mL. Just got my Gleason 6 diagnosis (3+3, 2/16 cores <5%) on 5 July at Mayo in Phoenix. Uro Doc there who did the biopsy suggest active surveillance. Going back next month to discuss that, and what I can do for the never ending prostatitis (some cores were dx'd as acute and chronic prostatitis). Anyway - reading the little bit that I have the last few days, I see a trend where people who get some form of ablation to treat BPH or localized PCa, if they have to go back because of rising PSA levels, for a Salvage radical prostatectomy, the outcomes don't look good.
Part of me is thinking, active surveillance would be great if I had no prostatitis symptoms, but, the PCa diagnosis limits my options to treat the prostatitis - and if I did go that route (treating it), I'd be increasing chances that if I needed a Salvage prostatectomy later - the outcome would be worse than if I just go whole hog now and tell them to remove the prostate.
Thoughts? As a newby... is my line of reasoning flawed? I am open for anyone's opinion or advice.....
Thanks,
G.
AZ
