I figure this is the best area for this, but feel free to move it.

I recently underwent robotic arm surgery for my 100% service connected prostate cancer and figured I would share some numbers with my conservative brethren (and others) in case this disease, 100% service connected or not, afflicts them.  And I wouldn't wish it on anybody, not even a conservatard.  Well, maybe a radical muslim, but not a garden variety muslim.

Anyway, the TOTAL cost (hospital, surgeon, anesthesiologist, and a few incidentals was $33,361.  I was in the hospital one day.  My insurance, which is good insursance, had agreements with the providers that only allowed $14,510 (43½%) of that, of which my share was $3,544.  I have already met my maximum out of pocket this year, so any more is on the insurance.  But I hope there is no more.  I've had quite enough health care for one year.

Anyhow, there seems something inherently messed up with a healthcare system that has this big of a disparity between retail and acceptable pricing.  I mean, I think everybody made plenty on it.  None of them looked poor, anyway.  And none of them seemed reluctant to do the deed. 

If any of you are unfortunate enough to contract this disease, I recommend you get a copy of a book by Dr. Patrick Walsh.  I can't recall the name right off, but if you google Walsh and Prostate you'll probably find it.  It was EXTREMELY beneficial. 

What has arm surgery to do with your disability?

Quote from: Solar on February 17, 2012, 11:54:04 AM
What has arm surgery to do with your disability?

The surgery, control the robotic arms for the prostate sugery. 

Quote from: walkstall on February 17, 2012, 12:43:10 PM

The surgery, control the robotic arms for the prostate sugery. 

Thanks, I thought he was talking about arthroscopic surgery with robotic assist.

It's the DaVinci machine.  Here's a link to the book.

http://www.amazon.com/Patrick-Walshs-Surviving-Prostate-Cancer/dp/0446696897

What you want is a surgeon who is very skilled with the machine.  The skill of the surgeon is much more important to you than the machine.  But here's an illustration of how good this machine is in the hands of a skilled surgeon (mine has done about a thousand of these with the machine).

I have a friend who had a radical prostatectomy 10 years ago, when he was 41.  No machine.  Had it the old fashioned way.  Very skilled surgeon, though.  Very successful operation.  He was in the hospital 5 days, spent 30 days on a catheter, and missed 3 months of work.

I had the surgery, with the machine, in my early sixties.  I was in the hospital one day, on a catheter 8 days, and missed 3 weeks of work.

Good to know the surgery was a success.   Hopefully it takes care of the problem for good.  Cancer is an ugly disease.  Toy 

My dad was diagnosed in his late 60s, doctor suggested he leave it alone, the risk of removal as opposed to its growth rate was more dangerous than removing it.
Had he been 15 years younger, removal would have been to only option.
He lived to 95 with no complications.

Quote from: Solar on February 18, 2012, 06:46:58 AM
My dad was diagnosed in his late 60s, doctor suggested he leave it alone, the risk of removal as opposed to its growth rate was more dangerous than removing it.
Had he been 15 years younger, removal would have been to only option.
He lived to 95 with no complications.

I am glad he did.  Gleason score has a lot to do with it.  That's a measure of the cancer's aggressiveness.  6 and below, not so aggressive.  7 and up, more aggressive.  The advice I got (from more than one source, including three books I bought) was that IF you were about 60 (which I was) and IF you had a little trouble getting a good urine flow (which I did) and IF your gleason score was 7 or more (which mine was, and it was early in the process), then surgery was probably the best option for long term prognosis.  Leaving it alone would have been a more viable option at age 70 (what is called "watchful waiting"), and radiation would have been a more viable option if the gleason score was not 7 and I was older.  All things considered, I opted for the surgery.  Full recovery of all function is what usually happens in 98% of the cases where a skilled surgeon using the robot does the procedure, but I won't know for sure for maybe 2 more months. 

Most men, if they live long enough, do die with prostate cancer but not from it.  It just depends on age at diagnosis and aggressiveness, and to a certain extent, luck of the draw. 

Quote from: elmerfudd on February 18, 2012, 11:59:08 AM
I am glad he did.  Gleason score has a lot to do with it.  That's a measure of the cancer's aggressiveness.  6 and below, not so aggressive.  7 and up, more aggressive.  The advice I got (from more than one source, including three books I bought) was that IF you were about 60 (which I was) and IF you had a little trouble getting a good urine flow (which I did) and IF your gleason score was 7 or more (which mine was, and it was early in the process), then surgery was probably the best option for long term prognosis.  Leaving it alone would have been a more viable option at age 70 (what is called "watchful waiting"), and radiation would have been a more viable option if the gleason score was not 7 and I was older.  All things considered, I opted for the surgery.  Full recovery of all function is what usually happens in 98% of the cases where a skilled surgeon using the robot does the procedure, but I won't know for sure for maybe 2 more months. 

Most men, if they live long enough, do die with prostate cancer but not from it.  It just depends on age at diagnosis and aggressiveness, and to a certain extent, luck of the draw. 

well lets hope you have a full recovery.
My dad's case was borderline, a little bleeding was his only side effect outside of having trouble urinating.
But the doctors told him with the amount of cancer, he ran the risk of having to wear a colostomy bag the rest of his life, he said he'd take the gamble and it paid off.
But this was more than 30 years ago, before robotics.

Quote from: Solar on February 18, 2012, 12:10:15 PM
well lets hope you have a full recovery.
My dad's case was borderline, a little bleeding was his only side effect outside of having trouble urinating.
But the doctors told him with the amount of cancer, he ran the risk of having to wear a colostomy bag the rest of his life, he said he'd take the gamble and it paid off.
But this was more than 30 years ago, before robotics.

In his shoes, I'd have taken the risk, too.  I seriously considered it even in my shoes. 

One thing I found it is that once you've opted for radiation, even just the implanted "seeds," you're no longer a good candidate for surgery for that very reason: the potential of ending up with a colostomy.  The radiatino destroys so much other tissue besides the cancer that the  surgery becomes very, very risky.  Not to life, but the risk is that one will end up completly incontinent with respect to urinary function and with a colostomy to boot. 

I am just very grateful to Uncle Sugar for the financial help I am receiving.  It is more than covering my out of pocket costs.  The VA is a pretty good social program entitlement in certain csses, IMO. 

Quote from: elmerfudd on February 19, 2012, 03:11:05 PM
In his shoes, I'd have taken the risk, too.  I seriously considered it even in my shoes. 

One thing I found it is that once you've opted for radiation, even just the implanted "seeds," you're no longer a good candidate for surgery for that very reason: the potential of ending up with a colostomy.  The radiatino destroys so much other tissue besides the cancer that the  surgery becomes very, very risky.  Not to life, but the risk is that one will end up completly incontinent with respect to urinary function and with a colostomy to boot. 

I am just very grateful to Uncle Sugar for the financial help I am receiving.  It is more than covering my out of pocket costs.  The VA is a pretty good social program entitlement in certain csses, IMO. 

I don't understand, the VA only covered part of it?

Quote from: Solar on February 19, 2012, 03:22:04 PM
I don't understand, the VA only covered part of it?

They would have covered all of it, and, in fact, may end up paying me slightly more than what it cost, even the part paid by my insurance.  But I did not opt to have the surgery at the VA because they do not have the DaVinci machine and their surgeons, while very skilled, are mostly residents who will have done maybe 5, at most 10 of these things.  I opted for a guy who had done a thousand using the robot beacuse the outcome would most likely be much better.

But if I had not had good insurance that lowered the cost from retail of about $33 thousand to actual of about $14,500, the VA payments I will receive would not have covered the total cost.  I recall a thread somewhere in here where a guy said he could see why a fellow would take his chances and not spend $50 a month on insurance but just pay as he goes.  Well, I said then (and I say again), health insurance that costs $50 a month is not much insurance.  You may as well take your chances if that's all you're buying.  Good insurance costs, for my wife and me, about $8500 a year.  My employr pays my part, which is about 48% of the total, and I pay the other part.  When my kids were on it, it was a little more, although it's the same for one kid as it is 15.  Or any other number. 

Quote from: elmerfudd on February 19, 2012, 03:30:04 PM
They would have covered all of it, and, in fact, may end up paying me slightly more than what it cost, even the part paid by my insurance.  But I did not opt to have the surgery at the VA because they do not have the DaVinci machine and their surgeons, while very skilled, are mostly residents who will have done maybe 5, at most 10 of these things.  I opted for a guy who had done a thousand using the robot beacuse the outcome would most likely be much better.

But if I had not had good insurance that lowered the cost from retail of about $33 thousand to actual of about $14,500, the VA payments I will receive would not have covered the total cost.  I recall a thread somewhere in here where a guy said he could see why a fellow would take his chances and not spend $50 a month on insurance but just pay as he goes.  Well, I said then (and I say again), health insurance that costs $50 a month is not much insurance.  You may as well take your chances if that's all you're buying.  Good insurance costs, for my wife and me, about $8500 a year.  My employr pays my part, which is about 48% of the total, and I pay the other part.  When my kids were on it, it was a little more, although it's the same for one kid as it is 15.  Or any other number. 

Ahhh, and I don't blame you, the VA has been good to me, but the fact is, the majority of their doctors are second class.
Like most Gov employees, they aren't motivated the same as the private sector.

Quote from: Solar on February 19, 2012, 03:38:53 PM
Ahhh, and I don't blame you, the VA has been good to me, but the fact is, the majority of their doctors are second class.
Like most Gov employees, they aren't motivated the same as the private sector.

My experience with VA docs has not been as bad as yours, apparently. None of them have been second class.  Maybe just not as experienced.  In fact, one of the surgeons in the group I used was a VA resident at one time.

In fact, I would venture to say that people frequently get what they expect.  When I go to the VA, I espect to be served by comptetent, caring professionals.  And I have been. There was one physician who had a monstrous chip on her shoulder for some reason, but she left for the "private sector."  Even she did a good job, IMO.

I bet you expect second class service, don't you?  That may be why you get it.