Dr. Todd Morgan

In the setting of a patient who's planning on undergoing surgery, it's hard to justify, I think. There's a lot of scans for not a lot of gain.

In the setting of a patient who's planning on undergoing surgery, it's hard to justify, I think. There's a lot of scans for not a lot of gain.

In the setting of a patient who's planning on undergoing surgery, it's hard to justify, I think. There's a lot of scans for not a lot of gain.

So they come back and they have a PSA, you know, recur within a year, PSA is 0.2, and you get that PET. And at that point, they've got one positive external iliac lymph node. Okay, well, you know what to do.

So they come back and they have a PSA, you know, recur within a year, PSA is 0.2, and you get that PET. And at that point, they've got one positive external iliac lymph node. Okay, well, you know what to do.

So they come back and they have a PSA, you know, recur within a year, PSA is 0.2, and you get that PET. And at that point, they've got one positive external iliac lymph node. Okay, well, you know what to do.

Should we have not done surgery if, you know, if they actually did have that, if you could see that? Certainly, it really gets into this important controversial area where we have no data, which is for those patients with small volume pelvic nodal disease visible only on a PSMA PET, are they appropriate surgical candidates? And I would argue that they

Should we have not done surgery if, you know, if they actually did have that, if you could see that? Certainly, it really gets into this important controversial area where we have no data, which is for those patients with small volume pelvic nodal disease visible only on a PSMA PET, are they appropriate surgical candidates? And I would argue that they

Should we have not done surgery if, you know, if they actually did have that, if you could see that? Certainly, it really gets into this important controversial area where we have no data, which is for those patients with small volume pelvic nodal disease visible only on a PSMA PET, are they appropriate surgical candidates? And I would argue that they

Understanding with all these conversations and likely need for salvage treatment, that's a small volume disease with the nodes in the region where we perform a node dissection. I think it's totally, totally very, you know, add whatever other word you want to put there that's appropriate to do to offer surgery.

Understanding with all these conversations and likely need for salvage treatment, that's a small volume disease with the nodes in the region where we perform a node dissection. I think it's totally, totally very, you know, add whatever other word you want to put there that's appropriate to do to offer surgery.

Understanding with all these conversations and likely need for salvage treatment, that's a small volume disease with the nodes in the region where we perform a node dissection. I think it's totally, totally very, you know, add whatever other word you want to put there that's appropriate to do to offer surgery.

We get it at six weeks. I know some people get it at three months, sometime in there. I don't think it really matters when you get that post-op PSA. You need to wait a certain amount of time, right, for the PSA to be able to decrease to an undetectable level. Our pathway is a six-week PSA. That's how it's been everywhere that I've trained. What do you guys do?

We get it at six weeks. I know some people get it at three months, sometime in there. I don't think it really matters when you get that post-op PSA. You need to wait a certain amount of time, right, for the PSA to be able to decrease to an undetectable level. Our pathway is a six-week PSA. That's how it's been everywhere that I've trained. What do you guys do?

We get it at six weeks. I know some people get it at three months, sometime in there. I don't think it really matters when you get that post-op PSA. You need to wait a certain amount of time, right, for the PSA to be able to decrease to an undetectable level. Our pathway is a six-week PSA. That's how it's been everywhere that I've trained. What do you guys do?

Typically standard sensitive, except for those patients at really high risk of recurrence, where maybe we want to keep a little bit closer eye on it. But I don't love ultrasensitive because of all the anxiety that it causes for the typical patient where it's going from 0.02 to 0.03. How would anybody understand that to be anything other than it's something that's worrisome?

Typically standard sensitive, except for those patients at really high risk of recurrence, where maybe we want to keep a little bit closer eye on it. But I don't love ultrasensitive because of all the anxiety that it causes for the typical patient where it's going from 0.02 to 0.03. How would anybody understand that to be anything other than it's something that's worrisome?

Typically standard sensitive, except for those patients at really high risk of recurrence, where maybe we want to keep a little bit closer eye on it. But I don't love ultrasensitive because of all the anxiety that it causes for the typical patient where it's going from 0.02 to 0.03. How would anybody understand that to be anything other than it's something that's worrisome?

Whereas we know that that's fine. So I really like that less than 0.1. But there are some patients where, yeah, they're at really high risk of recurrence. And I'd like to have a sense of the trend. And yeah, if I see it's 0.06, 0.08, we know probably it's coming and we can start to lay the groundwork for potential salvage treatment.

Whereas we know that that's fine. So I really like that less than 0.1. But there are some patients where, yeah, they're at really high risk of recurrence. And I'd like to have a sense of the trend. And yeah, if I see it's 0.06, 0.08, we know probably it's coming and we can start to lay the groundwork for potential salvage treatment.