Last night, I had a telephone consultation with a physician I mentioned previously. He was very skeptical of my ultrasound results, having concerns with both the physician and the claimed sensitivity of the test. He believes that based on a current consensus of experts, this ultrasound technology alone is only around 20% likely to detect prostate cancer, rather than the >90% claimed by the radiologist that did the ultrasound. From what I understand, his preferred method of detecting prostate cancer is a “3 Tesla” high resolution MRI, followed (if necessary) by a biopsy guided by the MRI and ultrasound results.
He also suggests that in patients who do not exhibit cancer, he is able to diagnose prostatitis with his procedure. He has a diet and dietary supplements that can help treat prostatitis and possibly lower PSA levels if they are the result of prostatitis.
I don’t have the expertise to determine who is right or who is wrong. In all liklihood, both philosophies may have merit to some degree. It may not be unlike how there are a number of different treatments for prostate cancer, and various well-regarded urologists, oncologists and surgeons will have their own preference as to which of them is the best option. All of them have pros and cons which should be considered by the patient as carefully as possible. Ultimately, it may even come down to which opinion you trust and respect the most.
As for now, I still have some options to consider. I’m still awaiting the “partial set” of ultrasound images. I received one small, greyscale 2D image via email this morning. For $950, I sure hope there are more showing the areas of interest for future use. Any benefit of having “3D”, “4D” or “Doppler” enhancement with color are completely lost with the images I received so far.