Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2003 Jun;4(3):248-52.
doi: 10.1007/s11934-003-0077-0.

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

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

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

Christian Chaussy et al. Curr Urol Rep. 2003 Jun.

Abstract

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) pound 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.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Cancer Res. 1992 Nov 15;52(22):6353-7 - PubMed
    1. J Urol. 1999 Jan;161(1):156-62 - PubMed
    1. J Endourol. 2000 Aug;14(6):519-28 - PubMed
    1. J Endourol. 2001 May;15(4):437-40; discussion 447-8 - PubMed
    1. Mol Urol. 2000 Fall;4(3):183-7;discussion 189 - PubMed

Publication types

Substances