urologists' attitude to prostate removal

[Jon]

Having read David Reid's account of his prostatitis treatment, and the negative attitude of doctors towards taking out the prostate, I would like to know why most urologists (including mine) automatically dismiss this option. The only reason I've seen on one posting is that the scars of surgery will create more pain than the original condition. Is this true? Do patients who have LRP for whatever reason commonly experience such pain? Presumably in medical school these urologists are given some reason for not considering this form of treatment. Was it tried in the past and found to be unsuccessful? Is there some information in a medical textbook somewhere which gives a plausible reason? I'd really like to know! 

[Arnon Krongrad, MD]

Far it be from me to know why people do what they do. That said, the reason to be cautious generally is that new things don't always turn out to meet our hopes for them. Because surgery carries risk and because there are no scientific studies of surgery for chronic prostatitis, this would seem to be ample reason for caution.

David does make reference to pain from scar tissue. I have no idea why someone said that to him. It makes no sense.

And no, medical schools probably do not specifically teach us to not do surgery. More likely, the subject simply does not come up.

[Jon]

Hopefully, when you've published your study there will be radical change in urologists' attitudes, and many other doctors will be encouraged to try this option where suitable.