Complications possible with TURP

Dear Dr. Roach: I’m an 80-year-old male who learned from a much younger male about the tremendous improvement he’s had in his life since undergoing a TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate) procedure.

I hadn’t know he was having a problem and had been through the drug routine that was providing him with limited improvement.

Against my aversion of being operated upon, he subsequently convinced me to investigate, and ultimately have the operation.

That was a few months ago, and I have subsequently introduced the idea to many other males, or their wives, none of who had heard about the simple, overnight operation.

The benefit of the drug therapy, which left me with persistent symptoms of not being able to urinate for a long time (as long as 10 to 15 minutes), was insignificant relative to the result of the TURP operation, which had greatly improved both of those problems.

There must be many more males, and their wives, who would benefit from knowing that the operation is simple and effective.

M.M.

Answer: I am very glad you had such good results after your surgery. I have had several letters like yours, wondering why I don’t recommend TURP.

The answer is that I get still other letters about, and have also seen in my own patients, the complications men can get from TURP surgery.

One man, who had bleeding and spasm after surgery, wrote me: “I believe that I would rather lead an attack on hell itself with a bucket of ice water than go through this procedure again.”

In my experience with men with symptomatic enlargement of the prostate, most men do get adequate relief from medications, usually without untoward side effects.

There are absolutely men who get inadequate relief or who get side effects from medication that make the cure worse than the disease.

In those situations, TURP or similar surgery is worth considering if a man understands that there are indeed bad outcomes and is still willing to take the risk.