PROSTATE
FOCUS
MAY 2008
If you find any of our articles/comments helpful a method of donating is provided. This will ensure the contination of this online edition of Prostate Focus. You do not need a Paypal account to donate - you can use your debit/credit card via Paypal secure payment method.
If this is inconvenient send a cheque direct to Prostate Help 2003 Ltd., LANGWORTH, LINCOLN, LN3 5DF. Please mark the back of your cheque DONATION.
Randomized Studies Presented at AUA 2008 Show Effectiveness, Safety of GreenLight™ PVP vs. TURP for Treatment of BPH
Researchers from Around the World Exhaustively Examine GreenLight Laser Therapy On All Types of Patients; Twenty GreenLight Studies Presented at Orlando Meeting
ORLANDO, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--American Medical Systems, Inc. (AMS) announced today the presentation of a range of studies on its GreenLight™ laser system at the 2008 annual meeting of the American Urological Society (AUA) in Orlando. Among the twenty abstracts presented, two were randomized studies, conducted by international teams of researchers, concluding that Photoselective Vaporization of the Prostate (PVP) performed with the GreenLight laser is safer than, and as effective as, Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP), the most common type of surgery for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH).
“These studies support AMS’ belief that GreenLight is the best treatment for men suffering from BPH,” said Ross Longhini, Chief Operating Officer at American Medical Systems. “For nearly 10 years, medical researchers from around the world have exhaustively examined the usage, indications, outcomes and safety of the GreenLight system. The clinical papers presented at AUA provide perhaps the most compelling set of evidence yet for the efficacy and safety of the GreenLight PV® and GreenLight High Performance System (HPS) ® for a wide range of patients.”
In addition to the randomized studies, research data presented included:
- Findings that GreenLight laser therapy is safe, effective and durable out to 5 years for the treatment of men with BPH
- Studies demonstrating that GreenLight HPS is significantly faster than the GreenLight PV system, but is just as safe and effective
- Evidence that GreenLight HPS quickly and safely treats patients with prostate glands over 80g
- Additional evidence that GreenLight may be the most safe and effective treatment for BPH in most patients
GreenLight laser therapy, with over 300,000 procedures performed worldwide, has become a favored alternative to TURP due to it being a minimally invasive outpatient procedure, its high tissue removal efficiency, quick recovery time, and rapid flow rate improvement with minimal side effects. The patented 532nm wavelength laser provides efficient vaporization of prostatic tissue, due to the wavelength’s high absorption in oxyhemoglobin, and low absorption in water - ensuring laser energy is not lost in the procedural irrigation medium.
GreenLight HPS is a newer version of its predecessor, the GreenLight PV system that removes tissue more rapidly resulting in shorter procedure times and the ability to treat larger glands more efficiently. The physical properties of HPS yield safety and efficacy outcomes consistent with GreenLight PV.
Of the twenty GreenLight PVP studies presented at AUA 2008, seventeen were independently conducted whereas three were funded through AMS research grants.
Readers should be aware that regardless of any studies that it is the individual surgeon who does your treatment who is the key to the success of your treatment. So find out how many treatments your surgeon has done and ensure you are not one of the men he is trialling his abilities on !
Miracle Drug Prevents and Cures Cancers.
Also recommended as First Line treatment for
Asthma, Bronchitis and Cataracts.
That would have been the headline in our Daily Press if Quercetin had been churned out from one of our major pharmaceutical companies.
But of course it wasn’t. Quercetin is a natural product found in a diverse range of fruits and plants from onions and apples to wine and your cup of tea.
Now I’m not saying that quercetin prevents or cures cancers, mainly because I am not allowed to say such a thing. Only a pharma (pharmaceutical company) has the authority to do that however tenuous the link maybe between their drug and the patients eventual recovery. However, what I can say is that medics in the research field have found that quercetin seems to perform very well at targeting malignant cells which current treatments seem unable to do or can only do by causing serious damage to healthy cells and subsequent permanent damage to a patients future lifestyle.
So to cut out all the waffle in which I often indulge, (its my web site !!) let us cut to the chase.
There have been many studies into the actions of quercetin but the latest by researchers at the Institute of Food Research (USA) and published in the journal "Atheroscleroisis" has found a new fact. Quercetin appears to provide protection against cardiovascular disease.
Lead researcher Paul Kroon commented. "We tested compounds that are actually found in the blood, rather than the flavonoid in food before it is eaten, as only these compounds will actually come into contact with human tissues and have an effect on arterial health. When tested on the cells lining human blood vessels, both quercetin and its metabolites (which are produced as the body breaks it down) were found to reduce the inflammation that can lead to cardiovascular disease."
"The effect is more subtle than laboratory experiments using quercetin," Kroon said. "But we can confirm that eating quercetin-rich foods may help prevent chronic inflammation leading to cardiovascular disease, because the metabolites still have an effect on the cells lining the blood vessels."
The PHA have for many years advised our readers of the benefits of quercetin. Chiefly in respect of its ability to help men with prostatitis, (and incidently women and men with cystitis). But it is known that inflammation of areas in the body can lead to cancer in later life, so the use of a powerful anti-inflammatory like quercetin has always seemed, to me, to be a sensible precaution against cancer.
In 2003 we noted in Prostate Focus that ‘Dr Patrick Quillan of Cancer Treatment Centres of America had assembled some interesting data on Quercetin in regard to cancer. Quercetin has, he advised, ‘the potential to revert a cancerous cell back to a normal healthy cell’. Quercetin also induces apoptosis, or programmed cell death, in otherwise ‘immortal’ cancer cells, and it inhibits inflammation by reducing histamine release and reduces tumour cell-proliferation.’
So to sum up quercetin appears to provide protection against cardiovascular disease.
We have also seen studies which show its ability to decrease the risks of cancer, allergies, cataracts and respiratory diseases including asthma and bronchitis. In addition we know from reports of prostatitis sufferers that it subdues the pain and has allowed readers of Focus to resume a normal life again after many months and even years of pain. (PD)
You can buy a pack of quercetin here .
There is much talk of tablets bought on the internet made from sawdust, brickdust and a host of other unbelievable waste material. You can buy quality quercetin tablets from a reliable company produced exclusively for the Prostate Help Association by Lifeplan Products Ltd. an ISO 9000 company.
Lifeplan are also accredited by the MHRA( Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency ), so all their products are produced to medical standards. Each step of the manufacture from selection of the quercetin to its shipment is monitored and checked for purity and quality. The products comply with all UK regulations regarding irradiation, GMO, contaminants and allergens.
Much product on the market is not of very good quality or purity. For instance some is irradiated to kill infestation and to improve its shelf life. This is done because the product was processed in unhygenic conditions and would have had bacteria present. Don’t risk your health, buy a quality product.
When is a TURP
not a complete resection ?
In days of yore when the only surgical option for BPH was a prostectomy, ( a complete removal of the prostate gland), (this via an incision in the abdomen) obviously all the prostate tissue went as well. When transurethral resection became the ‘GOLD STANDARD’ treatment, ( the removal of tissue from the gland by inserting an instrument via the urethra and cutting pieces from the centre of the prostate), the general opinion by the layman, the GP and apparently by some urologists was that all, or the majority of the tissue within the prostate capsule, was removed.
However, just over 12 years ago, work done by the department of urology and radiology, at the Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport, indicated that a TURP in a ‘complete sense’ was not always a TURP.
In the study a total of 432 patients had transurethral resections of their prostate gland. They also underwent special checks to calculate the amount of prostate tissue removed during the operation. In no case was more than 50% of the enlarged prostate tissue removed.
How many repeat operations could be saved if more of the gland was removed in the first place? It is true that the surgeon is limited in time by the use of glycine fluid (used for irrigating the prostate area during the operation). The problem is that this liquid can be absorbed by the body and produce traumatic side effects if the operation takes too long. Perhaps eventually the ‘long in the tooth’ TURP will be phased out together with the use of glycine fluid. There are newer techniques around such as the Gyrus PKV, my recommended procedure, if used by a competent medic. Such treatments are lower-costed, chiefly as they can be performed on a day case basis, freeing up hospital beds
and they have been shown to be as good as a TURP, result wise,
with a bonus of no serious side effects.
Proud Father. "My son is today a qualified surgeon".
Well endowed gentleman. "Congratulations, perhaps
you would attend to my enlarged prostate ?"
Son. "I think sir, I had better begin with smaller tasks."
This leads on to other thoughts, more importantly the test carried out on the material cut away from the prostate for cancer cells. Indeed many men write to the PHA and say they have had a TURP and the result showed that they have no prostate cancer. However, if the surgeon is cutting away less than 50% of the prostate, it would seem the majority, if not all, of the tissue he removes is the adenoma (the benign growth). This benign growth which begins and is massed in the prostate centre supplants the genuine prostate tissue and pushes it out toward the edges of the gland. As prostate cancer cells generally begin in the outer portion of the prostate (in the original, genuine prostate tissue), it would seem that in some cases this true prostate tissue may never be touched during the operation. It follows therefore that the question should ask the question; just how useful testing the tissue for cancer cells is at all and most certainly as a test for ‘early’ minute cells.
Back in 1996 when I first suggested a move from the old fashioned TURP to some of the new treatments which vapourise tissue it was advised that this would mean that there would be no tissue to check for cancer cells.
If the Newport, Gwent work was correct then how accurate can diagnosis be using just the ‘chips’ from a TURP operation , either then or now? This method of cancer diagnosis is no better than a biopsy, both methods should report to the patient that no cancer was found in the areas tested, not that he is cancer free.
It appears therefore, that for any man who wants to know if prostate cancer is creeping up on him he needs to continue to have his annual PSA checks, and not rely solely on the tests done on the tissue following a TURP operation.
That is if there is any point in knowing !!
It would seem to be safer to establish if a prostate is cancer free before any intrusive operation; bearing in mind that research has shown that the removal of prostate tissue which is cancerous can release cancer cells into the blood stream. A vapourising type treatment, i.e. No cutting and virtually no blood loss, means a minimum chance of cancer cells being disseminated around the body. This compares with a TURP with a blood loss which continues for several days. (PD)
