Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparisons of Oncological and Functional Outcomes Between Primary Whole-Gland Cryoablation and High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Localized Prostate Cancer

  • Urologic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to conduct a prospective, single-institutional comparison for primary whole-gland cryoablation and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in localized prostate cancer with respect to oncological and functional outcomes.

Methods

From October 2008 to December 2013, a total of 114 and 120 patients with primary whole-gland cryoablation and HIFU for localized prostate cancer, respectively, were enrolled in the study. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) biochemical recurrence defined by Phoenix definition, salvage treatment-free rate, metastasis-free rate, and PSA biochemical recurrence-free survival analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method were for oncological outcomes. Functional outcomes included complications and serial International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-5 scores, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and related quality of life (QoL) scores.

Results

During the mean follow-up duration of approximately 2 years, the PSA biochemical recurrence rates of the two groups were similar (cryoablation 25.4 %, HIFU 18.3 %). In terms of functional outcomes, patients with HIFU had significantly lower IPSS (5.70 vs. 9.04 at 24 months; p = 0.030), lower erectile dysfunction rate (65.6 vs. 88.0 %; p = 0.015), and higher IIEF-5 score (9.36 vs. 4.18 at 24 months; p = 0.028) than patients with cryoablation.

Conclusions

In this study, both primary whole-gland cryoablation and HIFU demonstrated good oncological outcomes for localized prostate cancer. We validated the safety of the two treatment modalities and identified the importance of combined HIFU and transurethral resection of the prostate. The HIFU patients experienced better urinary function improvement and more possible sexual function preservation than the cryoablation patients; therefore, HIFU may provide better quality of life for patients with localized prostate cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yancik R. Population aging and cancer: a cross-national concern. Cancer J. 2005;11(6):437–441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Quinn M, Babb P. Patterns and trends in prostate cancer incidence, survival, prevalence and mortality. Part I: international comparisons. BJU Int. 2002;90(2):162–173.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(3):203–213.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Bellardita L, Rancati T, Alvisi MF, et al. Predictors of health-related quality of life and adjustment to prostate cancer during active surveillance. Eur Urol. 2013;64(1):30–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jones JS, Rewcastle JC, Donnelly BJ, Lugnani FM, Pisters LL, Katz AE. Whole gland primary prostate cryoablation: initial results from the cryo on-line data registry. J Urol. 2008;180(2):554–558.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Crouzet S, Chapelon JY, Rouviere O, et al. Whole-gland ablation of localized prostate cancer with high-intensity focused ultrasound: oncologic outcomes and morbidity in 1002 patients. Eur Urol. 2014;65(5):907–914.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ganzer R, Fritsche HM, Brandtner A, et al. Fourteen-year oncological and functional outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound in localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2013;112(3):322–329.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Marberger M, Carroll PR, Zelefsky MJ, et al. New treatments for localized prostate cancer. Urology. 2008;72(6 Suppl):S36–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Robinson JW, Donnelly BJ, Saliken JC, Weber BA, Ernst S, Rewcastle JC. Quality of life and sexuality of men with prostate cancer 3 years after cryosurgery. Urology. 2002;60(2 Suppl 1):12–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Onik G, Narayan P, Vaughan D, Dineen M, Brunelle R. Focal “nerve-sparing” cryosurgery for treatment of primary prostate cancer: a new approach to preserving potency. Urology. 2002;60(1):109–114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mearini L, Nunzi E, Giovannozzi S, Lepri L, Lolli C, Giannantoni A. Urodynamic evaluation after high-intensity focused ultrasound for patients with prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer. 2014;2014:462153.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Inoue Y, Goto K, Hayashi T, Hayashi M. Transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2011;18(5):358–362.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Poissonnier L, Chapelon JY, Rouviere O, et al. Control of prostate cancer by transrectal HIFU in 227 patients. Eur Urol. 2007;51(2):381–387.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ahmed HU, Moore C, Emberton M. Minimally-invasive technologies in uro-oncology: the role of cryotherapy, HIFU and photodynamic therapy in whole gland and focal therapy of localised prostate cancer. Surg Oncol. 2009;18(3):219–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Li LY, Lin Z, Yang M, Gao X, Xia TL, Ding T. Comparison of penile size and erectile function after high-intensity focused ultrasound and targeted cryoablation for localized prostate cancer: a prospective pilot study. J Sex Med. 2010;7(9):3135–3142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shoji S, Nakano M, Nagata Y, Usui Y, Terachi T, Uchida T. Quality of life following high-intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of localized prostate cancer: a prospective study. Int J Urol. 2010;17(8):715–719.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Caso JR, Tsivian M, Mouraviev V, Kimura M, Polascik TJ. Complications and postoperative events after cryosurgery for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012;109(6):840–845.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sumitomo M, Asakuma J, Sato A, Ito K, Nagakura K, Asano T. Transurethral resection of the prostate immediately after high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment for prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2010;17(11):924–930.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chaussy C, Thuroff S. The status of high-intensity focused ultrasound in the treatment of localized prostate cancer and the impact of a combined resection. Curr Urol Rep. 2003;4(3):248–252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Elliott SP, Meng MV, Elkin EP, et al. Incidence of urethral stricture after primary treatment for prostate cancer: data From CaPSURE. J Urol. 2007;178(2):529–534 discussion 534.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Thuroff S, Chaussy C, Vallancien G, et al. High-intensity focused ultrasound and localized prostate cancer: efficacy results from the European multicentric study. J Endourol. 2003;17(8):673–677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mottet N, Bellmunt J, van den Bergh RCN, Bolla M, van Casteren NJ, Cornford P, Joniau S, Mason MD, Matveev V, van der Kwast TH, van der Poel H, Rouvière O, Wiegel T. Guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):124–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Thuroff S, Chaussy C. Evolution and outcomes of 3 MHz high intensity focused ultrasound therapy for localized prostate cancer during 15 years. J Urol. 2013;190(2):702–710.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Blana A, Rogenhofer S, Ganzer R, et al. Eight years’ experience with high-intensity focused ultrasonography for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Urology. 2008;72(6):1329–1333 discussion 1333–1324.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Yi Yang Liu and Po Hui Chiang certify that there are no conflict of interest with any financial organization regarding the material discussed in this study.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Department of Urology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan

      Yi Yang Liu MD & Po Hui Chiang MD, PhD

    Authors
    1. Yi Yang Liu MD
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Po Hui Chiang MD, PhD
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Po Hui Chiang MD, PhD.

    Additional information

    Po Hui Chiang and Yi Yang Liu contributed equally to this article as co-authors.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Liu, Y.Y., Chiang, P.H. Comparisons of Oncological and Functional Outcomes Between Primary Whole-Gland Cryoablation and High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound for Localized Prostate Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 23, 328–334 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4686-x

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4686-x

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation