Why am I here?

Hello Mick.

Welcome to the forum. 

Have they given you the MRI results. Did it show anything suspicious? Did you get a PIRADS or Likert score?

I'm not medically trained but I doubt that your wait loss is prostate related. Your rise in PSA, which is still relatively low, could be due to other non cancerous prostate conditions.

The timescale for procedures seem reasonable. Your biopsy will shed much more light on your condition. You don't need an enema or to fast for the biopsy. You have no need to fret over the procedure. It's just a bit undignified and some find it a little uncomfortable. 

Most of us have felt anxious during these initial investigations. I know it's difficult but try not to worry and deal with one result at a time.

Good luck mate and please keep us informed how you get on.

Hi Mick,

Welcome aboard, hopefully your time here is short lived and it turns out to be nothing serious.

I started my journey back in early may of this year and to be honest the timescales you have mentioned seem pretty much the same as mine.

As Adrian has said, there will be a much clearer picture for you post biopsy and you can then plan with the relevant teams what comes next.

When I was at the same stage of you I was stressing myself over what was going to happen over the coming months and trying to research every possible outcome and option. Trust me (and I know it is easy for me to say) but try and just focus on the next step in the process, it will protect your sanity 🙂

Oh and try and keep busy and occupied, it really does help

Hi Mick

Reference time frames. It took 2 months from my first visit to the GP to being given a diagnosis of prostate cancer,  which was exactly what was explained to me at the time. To be honest it was a very efficient process.

For a more detailed view of my experience have a look at my profile.

LEN

Mick,

In the meantime while you are waiting for your biopsy, immediately request and obtain a copy of your MRI report. That not only identifies any abnormalities, it rates lesion’s under a PIRADS system. It also gives you important information on your prostate, volume, density size 

Mick,

Good luck with the results. My urologist was also in favor of trans rectal biopsies. He stated that certainly by just looking at the numbers and percentage’s , perinuem biopsies had reported a smaller lower infection rate, but felt rectal got a bad rap. He has done hundreds and no patient has had one. His belief is that you definitely need to take antibiotics beginning just before the biopsy and then for a week after. I actually had two different antibiotics to take. He said again from his experience and talking with other Urologists is that he believes patients have not adhered strictly to the post biopsy antibiotic regimen’s. I think it’s important not to scare people in advance of the rectal if that is what their Doctor is doing. 

Hi Mick.

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I was challenging the comments of the clinician, not anything you said. Especially as Ned@1 seemed to accept what he said as read.

I do not think anything you said was racist. I'm sorry if  I was not clear enough and you interpreted that way. 

I wouldn't even accuse the clinician, of being racist, just wrong. 

Hi Mick,

Thanks for the update. I'm very pleased for you. 👍

Just a quick question about my being discharged back to.my GP. 

The nurse said that my GP would be given a new baseline for my PSA level based on the results of my MRI.  My prostate volume was 65ml apparently,  whatever that indicates.

But the letter from the urology consultant simply said no sign of cancer,  if the patient still has concerns about his prostate he can ask for a repeat PSA test in a year. No mention of any new PSA threshold or anything. 

It just seems a little bit vague to say I fully expected to be told I had cancer based on the Lickert score of 4 on the two areas of concern on my prostate. 

When I rang to ask if someone could explain I was told the nurses were busy ringing all the people who really did have cancer. 

If I'm honest it's left me feeling like a bit of a fraud and that I was the one whining about prostate symptoms,  when it was just their protocols that put me here. 

The whole scoring system looks wrong to me; expressing PSA to two decimal places but then not considering jumpsto be significant,  having a 1 to 5 scoring system for the lickert scale with the top two just separated by the single word VERY, and no explanation afterwards.

I'm very happy to have got the fantastic news that I'm cancer free, but as it says here, they cannot tell you that you don't have cancer, just that they didn't find it in the biopsy samples. They only took three from each area so six samples seems quite minimal?

Any thoughts gratefully received. 

Mick