Thanks to all who replied with comments and suggestions; you guys are wonderful.
To clarify, the second doctor recommended CT Scan and cysto/biopsy in the O.R. based on the pathology report stating Grade 3. (I didn't have the Grade 2 opinion at the time I saw him). If the tumor was not Grade 3, I would assume his recommendation would have been different. (I'll ask about that). See my original post for my history. In 2000, the treatment for my Grade 2 tumor was 6 weeks of BCG. That kept me clean for 7 years. I don't see why now, if this is actually a Grade 2 tumor, the same treatment wouldn't work again. All I want is two people to agree on the grade. I cannot afford to overtreat a tumor that is not really high grade, nor do I want to put myself (and whoever, if anyone, I can find to drive me)through that for no good reason. But, of course, I can't afford to undertreat a tumor that really is high grade. If they can't decide on the grade based on this biopsy specimen, I'm not sure that the next one will be any less confusing. (In 2000 I had 3 opinions on the pathology and all differed, though none was higher than Grade 2 at that time.)
As for the stage, the biopsy was taken in the office prior to using electrofulguration to remove the tumors. Therefore, the lamina propria was not represented in the specimen, meaning that it is Ta, as far as could be seen. There was one very small tumor and one very tiny tumor. My urologist has confidence that they were superficial, not at all invasive, and that he removed everything. Unfortunately, by the time I formulated my questions, he was out of the country on vacation, and by the time he got back, I had seen two other doctors for opinions.
My second opinion doctor, with whom I have the cysto in the O.R. set up, did not communicate well with me. Case in point -- he said if the situation warranted it, he would recommend maintenance BCG (15 treatments over one year). I explained that I would have to have the treatments closer to home, as I could not take a half day off of work each time. He said he couldn't understand why I'd have to take a half day off. I explained that it took me almost 1-1/2 hours to get there. He said "Well, it's YOUR bladder." I didn't find that particularly helpful. And when I told him I was having feelings of sensitivity and slight urgency, his reply was "Well, that will get worse with BCG." When I told him I had no side effects from BCG in 2000, he laughed.
As anyone knows who has tried to work for their employer while playing phone tag with doctor's offices, sneaking around to receive and send release forms via fax, making appointments, having somewhat lengthy phone discussions with the doc in a cubicle with no privacy, etc., it can be very time-consuming and distracting. I have good reason to fear for my future at my job if my productivity continues to suffer, but I can't do my job and these other things at the same time, and I work the same hours as do the doctors' offices. There is so much to deal with. Tomorrow I also have to call the billing dept. about how the annual checkup cysto was billed. It was billed as a "surgery" even though all he did was look. Interesting... looking back to past annual cystos, I only paid an office copayment. Now, suddenly, I owe over
Thanks, Rosie, for the suggestions about the patient advocacy site and the cytology test. No, a cytology was not done, nor suggested by anyone, but I wonder why not.