The status of high-intensity focused ultrasound in the treatment of localized prostate cancer and the impact of a combined resection

To decrease side effects observed after high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment for localized prostate cancer and to re-establish normal micturition in a patient population that often presents with concomitant prostate enlargement, the impact of a combined transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and HIFU has been evaluated. TURP and HIFU treatments were performed under the same spinal anesthesia. For the HIFU treatments, the Ablatherm device (EDAP SA, Lyon, France) was used. Selection criteria for HIFU treatment were localized prostate cancer, no previous treatment for prostate cancer, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≤ 15 ng/mL at diagnosis. All patients meeting these criteria were considered for treatment and analysis. PSA nadir and stability, histology, International Prostate Specific Score (IPSS) and IPSS-quality of life, and morbidity were assessed during follow-up; 271 patients were selected: 96 in the HIFU group and 175 in the TURP plus HIFU group. A statistically significant impact was observed on catheter time (40.0 days versus 7.0 in median), incontinence (15.4% versus 6.9%), urinary infection (47.9% versus 11.4%), and the evolution of the post-treatment IPSS (8.91 versus 3.37 in average) in favor of the TURP plus HIFU group. No significant changes were observed regarding efficacy during short-term follow-up when considering a 25% retreatment rate in the HIFU group versus a 4% retreatment rate in the TURP plus HIFU group. The combination of a TURP and HIFU treatment reduces the treatment-related morbidity significantly. The patient management after a combined TURP and HIFU treatment is comparable with the management after a single TURP.

[1]  J M Dubernard,et al.  Treatment of prostate cancer with transrectal focused ultrasound: early clinical experience. , 1996, European urology.

[2]  C. Chaussy,et al.  High-intensity focused ultrasound: complications and adverse events. , 2000, Molecular urology.

[3]  J. Chapelon,et al.  Prostatic tissue destruction by high-intensity focused ultrasound: experimentation on canine prostate. , 1993, Journal of endourology.

[4]  J. Chapelon,et al.  Transrectal High Intensity Focused Ultrasound for the Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer: Factors Influencing the Outcome , 2001, European Urology.

[5]  C. Chaussy,et al.  High-intensity focused ultrasound in prostate cancer: results after 3 years. , 2000, Molecular urology.

[6]  J M Dubernard,et al.  Transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound: minimally invasive therapy of localized prostate cancer. , 2000, Journal of endourology.

[7]  Y Lasne,et al.  Local control of prostate cancer by transrectal high intensity focused ultrasound therapy: preliminary results. , 1999, The Journal of urology.

[8]  C. Chaussy,et al.  Results and side effects of high-intensity focused ultrasound in localized prostate cancer. , 2001, Journal of endourology.

[9]  J. Chapelon,et al.  Effects of high-energy focused ultrasound on kidney tissue in the rat and the dog. , 1992, European urology.

[10]  J. Schalken,et al.  Influence of high-intensity focused ultrasound on the development of metastases. , 1997, European urology.

[11]  R. Écochard,et al.  In vivo effects of high-intensity ultrasound on prostatic adenocarcinoma Dunning R3327. , 1992, Cancer research.