Patient Stories - Paul, 58

My name is Paul and I am 58 years old. I had no symptoms of prostate problems and the presence of cancer, which came to light during tests to investigate a suspected kidney stone, came as an unpleasant shock.

After the diagnosis of prostate cancer my first reaction was not the fear of imminent death but of what ‘common knowledge’ stated was the ‘certain outcome’ of incontinence and impotence. This was followed by intensive internet research leading to what appeared to be rather worse news that prostate cancer is a major cause of death amongst middle-aged males. It appeared that I had three possible treatment options:-

1. Do nothing and hope that I would outlive the cancer. This was not really an option for myself, with a cancer described as moderately aggressive any delay was clearly only going to make things worse.
2. Have radiotherapy to eliminate the cancer whilst retaining an effective prostate gland. This initially seemed the most attractive proposition particularly as I heard of targeted radiation with very good recorded results. However, I then learnt that there was always the possibility that some cancer cells might remain. Should this be the case, once radiotherapy had been performed it was very difficult, or even impossible, to then have surgery.
3. Have a radical prostatectomy - surgery to remove the prostate gland in its entirety. Back to the fears of the quality of life after such an operation.

I was extremely fortunate to have a nurse friend who made me aware that not all surgeons were alike (some actually publish results!) and that in many cases it was possible to preserve the nerves controlling potency and furthermore to minimize trauma to the sphincter muscle to enable a speedy return to full continence. In addition it was also possible to have a "keyhole" (laparoscopic) type operation rather than extensive cutting across the stomach muscles.

Having previously experienced keyhole surgery I was already aware of the benefits of faster recovery and less discomfort that it offered. A consultation with Mr Eden confirmed that I was a suitable candidate for laparoscopic surgery and that, whilst no guarantees could be made, that there was a very good chance (in excess of 95%) that both potency and continence could be preserved and it therefore seemed to me to be both a logical and an easy decision to go for option 3.

The initial period after the operation was virtually pain free, never more than mild discomfort with a return home after 3 days. The wearing of a catheter for 10 days following surgery was only a minor inconvenience once I got used to it. Towards the end of this period I noticed some blood appearing in the urine but a ‘phone call to the hospital reassured me that this was normal and only caused by the catheter tube irritating the bladder. My only other problem was constipation, which responded to lactulose.

I regained virtually full continence within days with spontaneous erections occurring within 4 weeks. I quickly became accustomed to the absence of ejaculate. I was able to walk 8 miles or more by 8 weeks. My wounds have healed completely with only some residual discoloration which I understand will disappear over time.

I have no hesitation in recommending this surgery to anyone else diagnosed with a similar condition.