Dr. Aytac H. Apaydin, MD

Please don’t go to this doctor! I had an appointment at 2 o’clock. I waited for an hour to get check. If I don’t leave the waiting room and ask when the doctor comes to check on me I would wait for one more hour. The doctor was having q procedure and no one let me know. Bad communication. I was asked to re schedule and no one cares. Horrible staff

This doctor is ridiculously late most of the time and knows he is the only urologist in the area and capitalizes on that aspect. Always late by atleast 45 minutes-1 hour AND playing catchup for another hour with patients that are already here waiting because double booking(standard) my current visit has 5 people booked for the same time block 1:45 as well as not being in the office he is setting appointments with while traveling to salinas with his other(seemingly more important) office. Avoid if you are able to find a different or closer professional. REDICULOUSLY LONG WAIT TIMES EXPECT NEARLY 2 HOURS PER VISIT for anything from first visit to checkup or anything in-between. (*update during appointment), he left for a second time making me wait an additional 30 minutes for an appointment scheduled at 1:45. It is 3pm and I have yet to be seen by the doctor.

My experience was so awful that I will not use any hospitals within the San Benito and Monterey County areas when I have kidney stones in order to avoid having Dr. Apaydin as my urologist. To make a long story short, here are the crib notes. He is constantly overbooked and always in a hurry to get to the next patient. He had to reschedule my DJ stent removal three times due to claims of not having anesthesia until I demanded that he remove it without anesthesia due to the excruciating pain and discomfort I endured throughout the time it had been inserted from May 2022 through July 2022. The only pain management I received during this entire time were two samll prescriptions for acetaminophen with codeine after expressing that codeine does absolutely nothing for me and I would need something stronger which resulted in several days of not being able to work due to pain. For more info, Google "Dr. Apaydin lawsuits" for his history of negligence.

I've seen Dr Paydin for years, nice doctor and attentive to my needs; however, his nurse (or staff) do not pay attention. I had a prescription for a few months that my insurance needed a call from the nurse to approve it and so far nothing, I've called twice and left messages; not only they have not call my insurance but have not return my calls either. The pharmacy called them twice as to the need for them to call the insurance.

I was recently seen at SVMH for a large kidney stone that needed urgent surgical care. Dr Apydin was the only Urologist on staff & I 100% refused to be seen by him. I would rather leave the hospital in agony & pain before being a pt of his. He has treated my husband, a co-worker & a family member in a span of 2years & everyone has had a negative experience. From multiple procedures, to extended (very) appointment wait times (over packed waiting room) & dates, (i.e. 3-5 weeks out). He zooms in & out of the exam room like you are an inconvenience & babbles on like YOU are supposed to know what is supposed to be the next step in your care. (Experience w/my spouse) I would never recommend this Dr. if my life depended on it. I was seen at another Urologist office.. kidney stone issue taken care of w/in one week. Unlike anyone I personally have talked to under Dr. Apydin’s care.

Staff are a little unorganized, but very nice. I did have a bad experience when I went in for my stent removal and they mis-scheduled my appointment and told me I wasn’t there for a removal (I definitely was scheduled for that procedure - took the day off work, drove over an hour, etc.. I was very mad. Also, very long waits). But doc ended up working me in anyway. Dr Apaydin (sp? sorry) is a genuinely good guy. He rushed when I was in need. I like them in general.

DO NOT GO HERE! THEY ARE SO UNPROFESSIONAL. ZERO STARS. After procedure my husband has severe swelling and pain and they refuse to give him pain meds. Front desk and office manager are very unprofessional, rude and INCOMPETENT. I don't understand how they still have a job but I am going to report this doctor and have already reported staff to alliance.

Very professional and knowledgeable about my issues. Never had any issues with him or his staff. He helped me deal with my prostate cancer and even asked if I wanted a 2nd opinion: he referred me to Dr Pruthi, Chief Urologist at UCSF. After seeing him, I felt more than comfortable coming back to Dr Apaydin and having them take care of me. 2 years now and feeling great. Thank you Dr Apaydin and Dr Green and staff

Skip to main content The United States Department of Justice You are here Home » Office of Public Affairs » News SHARE JUSTICE NEWS Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tuesday, January 23, 2018 Two California Urologists Agree to Pay More than $1 Million to Settle False Claims Act Allegations Related to Radiation Therapy Referrals Drs. Aytac Apaydin and Stephen Worsham, urologists based in Northern California, will pay $1.085 million to resolve allegations that they submitted and caused the submission of false claims to Medicare for image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) that was referred and billed in violation of the physician self-referral law (commonly known as the “Stark Law”) and the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Department of Justice announced. Drs. Apaydin and Worsham own and operate Salinas Valley Urology Associates (SVUA) in Salinas, California. They also owned Advance Radiation Oncology Center (AROC), located in Salinas, California, which dissolved in 2016. IGRT is used to treat patients who are diagnosed with cancer, including prostate cancer patients. “Health care laws prevent health care providers, and physicians in particular, from referring Medicare services in exchange for financial incentives,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing those laws and preventing physicians from improperly injecting profit motives into their decisions about patient care.” The Anti-Kickback Statute and the Stark Law are intended to ensure that a physician’s medical judgment is not compromised by improper financial incentives. The Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving remuneration to induce referrals of items or services covered by federal health care programs, including Medicare. The Stark Law forbids health care providers from billing Medicare for certain services referred by physicians who have a financial relationship with the entity performing the service, unless an exception applies. “The United States Attorney’s Office is committed to protecting the residents of the district from unlawful financial schemes that compromise patient care,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Alex G. Tse. “Patients who use our federal health care programs deserve care that is free from fraud. The few doctors who choose to engage in this type of conduct not only undermine the system, but impugn the many honest and dedicated medical professionals who serve our community.” The United States alleged that Drs. Apaydin and Worsham knowingly caused eight urologists in Monterey and Salinas, California (the “Lessee Urologists”) to violate the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Stark Law. Drs. Apaydin and Worsham allegedly solicited the Lessee Urologists to enter into lease agreements with AROC under which the Lessee Urologists could bill for, and thereby profit from, their referrals of IGRT performed at AROC. The United States also alleged that Drs. Apaydin and Worsham violated the Stark Law by improperly billing Medicare for their own IGRT referrals to AROC, despite the fact that AROC and SVUA were separate entities and their financial arrangements did not comply with any exceptions to the Stark Law. The Lessee Urologists previously entered into settlement agreements pertaining to their IGRT claims, under which they collectively agreed to pay the United States $900,000. The United States’ investigation was a coordinated effort by the Civil Division of the Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California, and the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General. The claims settled by this agreement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability. Topic(s): False Claims Act Health Care Fraud Component(s): Civil Division USAO - California, Northern Press Release Number: 18-74 Updated January 23, 2018 Related Links Speeches and Press Releases Videos Photos Blogs