Prostate ablations

doi:10.1017/CBO9781107338555.027

27 - Prostate ablations

from Section IX - Organ-specific cancers – prostate

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2016

Jonathan Coleman and

Edited by

Jean-Francois H. Geschwind and

Michael C. Soulen

Show author details

François Cornelis: Affiliation:
Department of Radiology
Jeremy C. Durack: Affiliation:
Department of Radiology
Behfar Ehdaie: Affiliation:
Department of Urology
Jonathan Coleman: Affiliation:
Department of Urology
Stephen B. Solomon: Affiliation:
Department of Radiology
Jean-Francois H. Geschwind: Affiliation:
Yale University School of Medicine, Connecticut
Michael C. Soulen: Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

In the last decades, the incidence of prostate cancer tripled to 152 new cases of prostate cancer per 100,000 men in 2013. Among cancer in men, it is the third most common cause of death in men, with 23 per 100,000 men/year. A better understanding of prostate cancer biology and earlier detection with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and imaging have contributed to interest in less invasive alternatives to surgical resection.

Focal tumor ablation has been increasingly used for local control or with curative intent in solid-organ tumors such as kidney, thyroid, breast, liver, and lung. While stimulating thought about ablation application in prostate cancer, clinical application has been limited despite encouraging functional and short-term oncological outcomes. Furthermore, despite evidence that men with low-risk localized prostate cancer may not benefit from treatment in terms of prostate cancer-specific mortality, many men still elect to undergo radical treatment. For these patients, minimally invasive options that could provide oncologic efficacy with little impact on quality of life may be attractive. More importantly, focal ablation of intermediate-risk tumors may enable more men to remain on active surveillance, thereby sparing them the consequent harms associated with radical treatment, including sexual, urinary, and bowel complications.

Prostate ablation is an emerging treatment modality offering promise for local cancer control with reduced morbidity relative to alternatives. The image-guided nature of focal ablation techniques is particularly appealing as preservation of erectile, urinary, and rectal function can be achieved by minimizing damage to the neurovascular bundles, external sphincter, bladder neck, and rectum. The reality, however, is that ablation strategies have not been standardized in the prostate. A trend toward targeted treatments in men with smaller tumor volume and away from whole- or half-gland therapy has been observed. One explanation is that the natural history of the disease is driven by the largest lesion with the highest grade, the so-called “index lesion,” and not by the presence of multiple foci of disease observed in surgical series. Improvements in imaging techniques, particularly magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), now enable visualization of small foci of prostate cancer. Whether focal ablation should play an increasing role in prostate cancer management is a matter of ongoing debate, though clinical outcomes after treatment of smaller-volume disease in other organs have been encouraging.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Interventional Oncology
Principles and Practice of Image-Guided Cancer Therapy
, pp. 265 - 282

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338555.027 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2016

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Cornelis, F, Rigou, G, Bras, Y Le, Coutouly, X, Hubrecht, R, Yacoub, M, et al. Real-time contrast-enhanced transrectal US-guided prostate biopsy: diagnostic accuracy in men with previously negative biopsy results and positive MR imaging findings. Radiology 2013; 269 (1): 159–166. PubMed PMID: 23657887.Google Scholar

2. Puech, P, Huglo, D, Petyt, G, Lemaitre, L, Villers, A. Imaging of organ-confined prostate cancer: functional ultrasound, MRI and PET/computed tomography. Curr Opin Urol 2009; 19 (2): 168–176.Google Scholar

3. Ahmed, HU, Hu, Y, Carter, T, Arumainayagam, N, Lecornet, E, Freeman, A, et al. Characterizing clinically significant prostate cancer using template prostate mapping biopsy. J Urol. 2011; 186 (2): 458–464.CrossRef Google Scholar

4. Solomon, SB, Silverman, SG. Imaging in interventional oncology. Radiology 2010; 257 (3): 624–640.Google Scholar

5. Solomon, SB, Silverman, SG. Imaging in interventional oncology. Radiology 2010; 257 (3): 624–640. PubMed PMID: 21084414.Google Scholar

6. Ahmed, HU, Hindley, RG, Dickinson, L, Freeman, A, Kirkham, AP, Sahu, M, et al. Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Lancet Oncol 2012; 13 (6): 622–632.Google Scholar

7. Ahmed, HU, Freeman, A, Kirkham, A, Sahu, M, Scott, R, Allen, C, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a phase I/II trial. J Urol 2011; 185 (21334018): 1246–1254.Google Scholar

8. Ahmed, HU, Akin, O, Coleman, JA, Crane, S, Emberton, M, Goldenberg, L, et al. Transatlantic Consensus Group on active surveillance and focal therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 109 (11): 1636–1647.Google Scholar

9. Ahmed, HU. Focal therapy will become standard treatment for localized prostate cancer: pro. J Urol 2012; 187 (3): 792–794.Google Scholar

10. Valerio, M, Ahmed, HU, Emberton, M, Lawrentschuk, N, Lazzeri, M, Montironi, R, et al. The role of focal therapy in the management of localised prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2014; 66 (4): 732–751. PubMed PMID: 23769825.Google Scholar

11. Barret, E, Ahallal, Y, Sanchez-Salas, R, Galiano, M, Cosset, JM, Validire, P, et al. Morbidity of focal therapy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2013; 63 (4): 618–622. PubMed PMID: 23265382.Google Scholar

12. Liu, W, Laitinen, S, Khan, S, Vihinen, M, Kowalski, J, Yu, G, et al. Copy number analysis indicates monoclonal origin of lethal metastatic prostate cancer. Nat Med 2009; 15 (5): 559–565.Google Scholar

13. Mayes, JM, Mouraviev, V, Sun, L, Tsivian, M, Madden, JF, Polascik, TJ. Can the conventional sextant prostate biopsy accurately predict unilateral prostate cancer in low-risk, localized, prostate cancer? Urol Oncol 2011; 29 (2): 166–170.Google Scholar

14. Berg, KD, Toft, BG, Roder, MA, Brasso, K, Vainer, B, Iversen, P. Is it possible to predict low-volume and insignificant prostate cancer by core needle biopsies? APMIS 2013; 121 (4): 257–265.Google Scholar

15. Sinnott, M, Falzarano, SM, Hernandez, AV, Jones, JS, Klein, EA, Zhou, M, et al. Discrepancy in prostate cancer localization between biopsy and prostatectomy specimens in patients with unilateral positive biopsy: implications for focal therapy. Prostate 2012; 72 (11): 1179–1186.Google Scholar

16. Maccagnano, C, Gallina, A, Roscigno, M, Raber, M, Capitanio, U, Saccà, A, et al. Prostate saturation biopsy following a first negative biopsy: state of the art. Urol Int 2012; 89 (2): 126–135.Google Scholar

17. Washington, SL, Bonham, M, Whitson, JM, Cowan, JE, Carroll, PR. Transrectal ultrasonography-guided biopsy does not reliably identify dominant cancer location in men with low-risk prostate cancer. BJU Int 2012; 110 (1): 50–55.Google Scholar

18. Katz, B, Srougi, M, Dall'Oglio, M, Nesrallah, AJ, Sant'anna, AC, Pontes, J, et al. Are we able to correctly identify prostate cancer patients who could be adequately treated by focal therapy? Urol Oncol 2012; 30 (6): 794–797.Google Scholar

19. Tsivian, M, Moreira, DM, Sun, L, Mouraviev, V, Kimura, M, Moul, JW, et al. Biopsy accuracy in identifying unilateral prostate cancer depends on prostate weight. Urol Oncol 2012; 30 (1): 21–25.Google Scholar

20. Polascik, TJ, Mayes, JM, Sun, L, Madden, JF, Moul, JW, Mouraviev, V. Pathologic stage T2a and T2b prostate cancer in the recent prostate-specific antigen era: implications for unilateral ablative therapy. Prostate 2008; 68 (13): 1380–1386.Google Scholar

21. Pallwein, L, Mitterberger, M, Gradl, J, Aigner, F, Horninger, W, Strasser, H, et al. Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and elastography in imaging of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol 2007; 17 (1): 39–47. PubMed PMID: 17143110. Epub 2006/12/05. eng.Google Scholar

22. Uemura, H, Sano, F, Nomiya, A, Yamamoto, T, Nakamura, M, Miyoshi, Y, et al. Usefulness of perflubutane microbubble-enhanced ultrasound in imaging and detection of prostate cancer: phase II multicenter clinical trial. World J Urol 2013; 31 (5): 1123–1128. PubMed PMID: 22311543. Epub 2012/02/09. Eng.Google Scholar

23. Crawford, ED, Rove, KO, Barqawi, AB, Maroni, PD, Werahera, PN, Baer, CA, et al. Clinical-pathologic correlation between transperineal mapping biopsies of the prostate and three-dimensional reconstruction of prostatectomy specimens. Prostate 2013; 73 (7): 778–787.Google Scholar

24. Barentsz, JO, Richenberg, J, Clements, R, Choyke, P, Verma, S, Villeirs, G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22 (4): 746–757.Google Scholar

25. Turkbey, B, Mani, H, Shah, V, Rastinehad, AR, Bernardo, M, Pohida, T, et al. Multiparametric 3T prostate magnetic resonance imaging to detect cancer: histopathological correlation using prostatectomy specimens processed in customized magnetic resonance imaging based molds. J Urol 2011; 186 (5): 1818–1824. PubMed PMID: 21944089. Epub 2011/09/29. eng.Google Scholar

26. Villers, A, Puech, P, Mouton, D, Leroy, X, Ballereau, C, Lemaitre, L. Dynamic contrast enhanced, pelvic phased array magnetic resonance imaging of localized prostate cancer for predicting tumor volume: correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. J Urol 2006; 176 (6): 2432–2437.Google Scholar

27. Puech, P, Potiron, E, Lemaitre, L, Leroy, X, Haber, G-P, Crouzet, S, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced-magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intraprostatic prostate cancer: correlation with radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2009; 74 (5): 1094–1099.Google Scholar

28. Lemaitre, L, Puech, P, Poncelet, E, Bouye, S, Leroy, X, Biserte, J, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of anterior prostate cancer: morphometric assessment and correlation with radical prostatectomy findings. Eur Radiol 2009; 19 (2): 470–480.Google Scholar

29. Barentsz, JO, Richenberg, J, Clements, R, Choyke, P, Verma, S, Villeirs, G, et al. ESUR prostate MR guidelines 2012. Eur Radiol 2012; 22 (4): 746–757. PubMed PMID: 22322308. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3297750.Google Scholar

30. Hoeks, CM, Schouten, MG, Bomers, JG, Hoogendoorn, SP, Kaa, CA Hulsbergen-van de, Hambrock, T, et al. Three-Tesla magnetic resonance-guided prostate biopsy in men with increased prostate-specific antigen and repeated, negative, random, systematic, transrectal ultrasound biopsies: detection of clinically significant prostate cancers. Eur Urol 2012; 62 (5): 902–909. PubMed PMID: 22325447. Epub 2012/02/14. Eng.Google Scholar

31. Pinto, F, Totaro, A, Calarco, A, Sacco, E, Volpe, A, Racioppi, M, et al. Imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis: present role and future perspectives. Urol Int 2011; 86 (4): 373–382. PubMed PMID: 21372554. Epub 2011/03/05. eng.Google Scholar

32. Pinto, PA, Chung, PH, Rastinehad, AR, Baccala, AA, Jr., Kruecker, J, Benjamin, CJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol 2011; 186 (4): 1281–1285. PubMed PMID: 21849184. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3193933. Epub 2011/08/19. eng.Google Scholar

33. Chang, JH, Lim, Joon D, Lee, ST, Hiew, CY, Esler, S, Gong, SJ, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI, C-choline PET and F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET for predicting the Gleason score in prostate carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2014; 24 (3): 715–722. PubMed PMID: 24192979.Google Scholar

34. Beheshti, M, Vali, R, Waldenberger, P, Fitz, F, Nader, M, Loidl, W, et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer by 18F fluorocholine and 18F fluoride PET-CT: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35 (18465129): 1766–1774.Google Scholar

35. Beheshti, M, Vali, R, Waldenberger, P, Fitz, F, Nader, M, Hammer, J, et al. The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT. Mol Imaging Biol 2009; 11 (19326171): 446–454.Google Scholar

36. Beheshti, M, Imamovic, L, Broinger, G, Vali, R, Waldenberger, P, Stoiber, F, et al. 18F choline PET/CT in the preoperative staging of prostate cancer in patients with intermediate or high risk of extracapsular disease: a prospective study of 130 patients. Radiology 2010; 254 (20177103): 925–933.Google Scholar

37. Eggener, SE, Scardino, PT, Carroll, PR, Zelefsky, MJ, Sartor, O, Hricak, H, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a critical appraisal of rationale and modalities. J Urol 2007; 178 (6): 2260–2267.Google Scholar

38. D'Amico, AV, Chen, MH, Catalona, WJ, Sun, L, Roehl, KA, Moul, JW. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy or external beam radiation therapy in men with 1 or more high-risk factors. Cancer 2007; 110 (1): 56–61. PubMed PMID: 17530618.Google Scholar

39. Humphrey, PA. Complete histologic serial sectioning of a prostate gland with adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1993; 17 (5): 468–472.Google Scholar

40. Karavitakis, M, Ahmed, HU, Abel, PD, Hazell, S, Winkler, MH. Anatomically versus biologically unifocal prostate cancer: a pathological evaluation in the context of focal therapy. Ther Adv Urol 2012; 4 (4): 155–160.Google Scholar

41. Ward, JF, Jones, JS. Focal cryotherapy for localized prostate cancer: a report from the national Cryo On-Line Database (COLD) Registry. BJU Int 2012; 109 (11): 1648–1654.Google Scholar

42. Bott, SRJ, Ahmed, HU, Hindley, RG, Abdul-Rahman, A, Freeman, A, Emberton, M. The index lesion and focal therapy: an analysis of the pathological characteristics of prostate cancer. BJU Int 2010; 106 (11): 1607–1611.Google Scholar

43. Mazzucchelli, R, Scarpelli, M, Cheng, L, Lopez-Beltran, A, Galosi, AB, Kirkali, Z, et al. Pathology of prostate cancer and focal therapy (‘male lumpectomy’). Anticancer Res 2009; 29 (12): 5155–5161.Google Scholar

44. Stamey, TA, Freiha, FS, McNeal, JE, Redwine, EA, Whittemore, AS, Schmid, HP. Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer. Cancer 1993; 71 (3 Suppl): 933–938.Google Scholar

45. Epstein, JI, Walsh, PC, Carmichael, M, Brendler, CB. Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer. JAMA 1994; 271 (5): 368–374.Google Scholar

46. Algaba, F, Montironi, R. Impact of prostate cancer multifocality on its biology and treatment. J Endourol 2010; 24 (5): 799–804.Google Scholar

47. Ahmed, HU. The index lesion and the origin of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2009; 361 (17): 1704–1706.Google Scholar

48. Lin, D, Bayani, J, Wang, Y, Sadar, MD, Yoshimoto, M, Gout, PW, et al. Development of metastatic and non-metastatic tumor lines from a patient's prostate cancer specimen-identification of a small subpopulation with metastatic potential in the primary tumor. Prostate 2010; 70 (15): 1636–1644.Google Scholar

49. Wise, AM, Stamey, TA, McNeal, JE, Clayton, JL. Morphologic and clinical significance of multifocal prostate cancers in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 2002; 60 (2): 264–269.Google Scholar

50. Wolters, T, Roobol, MJ, Leeuwen, PJ Van, den Bergh, RCN Van, Hoedemaeker, RF, Leenders, GJLH Van, et al. A critical analysis of the tumor volume threshold for clinically insignificant prostate cancer using a data set of a randomized screening trial. J Urol 2011; 185 (1): 121–125.Google Scholar

51. Grasso, CS, Wu, Y-M, Robinson, DR, Cao, X, Dhanasekaran, SM, Khan, AP, et al. The mutational landscape of lethal castration-resistant prostate cancer. Nature 2012; 487 (7406): 239–243.Google Scholar

52. Ganz, PA, Barry, JM, Burke, W, Col, NF, Corso, PS, Dodson, E, et al. NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Role of active surveillance in the management of men with localized prostate cancer. NIH Consens State Sci Statements 2011; 28 (1): 1–27.Google Scholar

53. Piersanti, M, Ezzat, S, Asa, SL. Controversies in papillary microcarcinoma of the thyroid. Endocr Pathol 2003; 14 (3): 183–191.Google Scholar

54. Allegra, CJ, Aberle, DR, Ganschow, P, Hahn, SM, Lee, CN, Millon-Underwood, S, et al. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference statement: diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ September 22–24, 2009. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102 (3): 161–169.Google Scholar

55. Graversen, JA, Mues, AC, Lorca, A Perez-Lanzac de, Landman, J. Active surveillance of renal cortical neoplasms: a contemporary review. Postgrad Med 2011; 123 (1): 105–113.Google Scholar

56. Kasivisvanathan, V, Emberton, M, Ahmed, HU. Focal therapy for prostate cancer: rationale and treatment opportunities. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2013; 25 (8): 461–473.Google Scholar

57. Nevoux, P, Ouzzane, A, Ahmed, HU, Emberton, M, Montironi, R, Presti, JC, et al. Quantitative tissue analyses of prostate cancer foci in an unselected cystoprostatectomy series. BJU Int 2012; 110 (4): 517–523.Google Scholar

58. Catto, JWF, Robinson, MC, Albertsen, PC, Goepel, JR, Abbod, MF, Linkens, DA, et al. Suitability of PSA-detected localised prostate cancers for focal therapy: experience from the ProtecT study. Br J Cancer 2011; 105 (7): 931–937.Google Scholar

59. Mouraviev, V, Villers, A, Bostwick, DG, Wheeler, TM, Montironi, R, Polascik, TJ. Understanding the pathological features of focality, grade and tumour volume of early-stage prostate cancer as a foundation for parenchyma-sparing prostate cancer therapies: active surveillance and focal targeted therapy. BJU Int 2011; 108 (7): 1074–1085.Google Scholar

60. Masterson, TA, Cheng, L, Koch, MO. Pathological characterization of unifocal prostate cancers in whole-mount radical prostatectomy specimens. BJU Int 2011; 107 (10): 1587–1591.Google Scholar

61. Polascik, TJ, Mayes, JM, Schroeck, FR, Sun, L, Madden, JF, Moul, JW, et al. Patient selection for hemiablative focal therapy of prostate cancer: variables predictive of tumor unilaterality based upon radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2009; 115 (10): 2104–2110.Google Scholar

62. Montorsi, F, Wilson, TG, Rosen, RC, Ahlering, TE, Artibani, W, Carroll, PR, et al. Best practices in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: recommendations of the Pasadena Consensus Panel. Eur Urol 2012; 62 (3): 368–381.Google Scholar

63. Eisenberg, ML, Shinohara, K. Partial salvage cryoablation of the prostate for recurrent prostate cancer after radiotherapy failure. Urology 2008; 72 (6): 1315–1318.Google Scholar

64. Pucar, D, Shukla-Dave, A, Hricak, H, Moskowitz, CS, Kuroiwa, K, Olgac, S, et al. Prostate cancer: correlation of MR imaging and MR spectroscopy with pathologic findings after radiation therapy–initial experience. Radiology 2005; 236 (2): 545–553.Google Scholar

65. Cellini, N, Morganti, AG, Mattiucci, GC, Valentini, V, Leone, M, Luzi, S, et al. Analysis of intraprostatic failures in patients treated with hormonal therapy and radiotherapy: implications for conformal therapy planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 53 (3): 595–599.Google Scholar

66. Arrayeh, E, Westphalen, AC, Kurhanewicz, J, Roach, M, Jung, AJ, Carroll, PR, et al. Does local recurrence of prostate cancer after radiation therapy occur at the site of primary tumor? Results of a longitudinal MRI and MRSI study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82 (5): 787–793.Google Scholar

67. Rouviere, O, Lyonnet, D, Raudrant, A, Colin-Pangaud, C, Chapelon, JY, Bouvier, R, et al. MRI appearance of prostate following transrectal HIFU ablation of localized cancer. Eur Urol 2001; 40 (3): 265–274.Google Scholar

68. Rouviere, O, Glas, L, Girouin, N, Mege-Lechevallier, F, Gelet, A, Dantony, E, et al. Prostate cancer ablation with transrectal high-intensity focused ultrasound: assessment of tissue destruction with contrast-enhanced US. Radiology 2011; 259 (2): 583–591.Google Scholar

69. Rouviere, O, Girouin, N, Glas, L, Cheikh, A Ben, Gelet, A, Mege-Lechevallier, F, et al. Prostate cancer transrectal HIFU ablation: detection of local recurrences using T2-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol 2010; 20 (1): 48–55.Google Scholar

70. Fischer, T, Thomas, A, Tardy, I, Schneider, M, Hunigen, H, Custodis, P, et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2-specific microbubbles for molecular ultrasound detection of prostate cancer in a rat model. Investig Radiol 2010; 45 (20733504): 675–684.Google Scholar

71. Pochon, S, Tardy, I, Bussat, P, Bettinger, T, Brochot, J, Wronski, M von, et al. BR55: a lipopeptide-based VEGFR2-targeted ultrasound contrast agent for molecular imaging of angiogenesis. Invest Radiol 2010; 45 (20027118): 89–95.Google Scholar

72. Eggener, S, Salomon, G, Scardino, PT, la Rosette, J de, Polascik, TJ, Brewster, S. Focal therapy for prostate cancer: possibilities and limitations. Eur Urol 2010; 58 (20378241): 57–64.Google Scholar

73. Gangi, A, Tsoumakidou, G, Abdelli, O, Buy, X, Mathelin, M de, Jacqmin, D, et al. Percutaneous MR-guided cryoablation of prostate cancer: initial experience. Eur Radiol 2012; 22 (8): 1829–1835. PubMed PMID: 22752525.Google Scholar

74. Cornelis, F, Grenier, N, Moonen, CT, Quesson, B. In vivo characterization of tissue thermal properties of the kidney during local hyperthermia induced by MR-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound. NMR Biomed 2011; 24 (7): 799–806. PubMed PMID: 21834004.Google Scholar

75. Bomers, JG, Yakar, D, Overduin, CG, Sedelaar, JP, Vergunst, H, Barentsz, JO, et al. MR imaging-guided focal cryoablation in patients with recurrent prostate cancer. Radiology 2013; 268 (2): 451–460. PubMed PMID: 23525206.Google Scholar

76. Cornelis, F, Havez, M, Bras, Y Le, Descat, E, Richaud, P, Grenier, N. Salvage CT-guided transgluteal cryoablation for locally recurrent prostate cancer: initial experiences. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (5): 685–689. PubMed PMID: 23622040.Google Scholar

77. Ryan, ER, Sofocleous, CT, Schoder, H, Carrasquillo, JA, Nehmeh, S, Larson, SM, et al. Split-dose technique for FDG PET/CT-guided percutaneous ablation: a method to facilitate lesion targeting and to provide immediate assessment of treatment effectiveness. Radiology 2013; 268 (1): 288–295. PubMed PMID: 23564714. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3689447.Google Scholar

78. Detti, B, Scoccianti, S, Franceschini, D, Cipressi, S, Cassani, S, Villari, D, et al. Predictive factors of [18F]-choline PET/CT in 170 patients with increasing PSA after primary radical treatment. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2013; 139 (3): 521–528. PubMed PMID: 23183655.Google Scholar

79. Bundschuh, RA, Wendl, CM, Weirich, G, Eiber, M, Souvatzoglou, M, Treiber, U, et al. Tumour volume delineation in prostate cancer assessed by [11C]choline PET/CT: validation with surgical specimens. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40 (6): 824–831. PubMed PMID: 23389430.Google Scholar

80. Sapareto, SA, Dewey, WC. Thermal dose determination in cancer therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1984; 10 (6): 787–800. PubMed PMID: 6547421. Epub 1984/06/01. eng.Google Scholar

81. Susani, M, Madersbacher, S, Kratzik, C, Vingers, L, Marberger, M. Morphology of tissue destruction induced by focused ultrasound. Eur Urol 1993; 23 Suppl 1: 34–38. PubMed PMID: 8513832.Google Scholar

82. Crouzet, SM, Kirchner, H, Thorpe, SJ. Fast saccades toward faces: face detection in just 100 ms. J Vision 2010; 10 (4): 1–7. PubMed PMID: 20465335.Google Scholar

83. Stride, EP, Coussios, CC. Cavitation and contrast: the use of bubbles in ultrasound imaging and therapy. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part H. J Eng Med 2010; 224 (2): 171–191. PubMed PMID: 20349814.Google Scholar

84. Muto, S, Yoshii, T, Saito, K, Kamiyama, Y, Ide, H, Horie, S. Focal therapy with high-intensity-focused ultrasound in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2008; 38 (3): 192–199.Google Scholar

85. Bahn, DK, Silverman, P, Lee, F, Badalament, R, Bahn, ED, Rewcastle, JC. Focal prostate cryoablation: initial results show cancer control and potency preservation. J Endourol 2006; 20 (16999628): 688–692.Google Scholar

86. Gonder, MJ, Soanes, WA, Shulman, S. Cryosurgical treatment of the prostate. Invest Urol 1966; 3 (4): 372–378. PubMed PMID: 4160242. Epub 1966/01/01. eng.Google Scholar

87. Onik, G, Vaughan, D, Lotenfoe, R, Dineen, M, Brady, J. The “male lumpectomy”: focal therapy for prostate cancer using cryoablation results in 48 patients with at least 2-year follow-up. Urol Oncol 2008; 26 (18774463): 500–505.Google Scholar

88. Hayek, OR El, Alfer, W, Jr., Reggio, E, Pompeo, AC, Arap, S, Srougi, M. Percutaneous prostate cryoablation as treatment for high-risk prostate cancer. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2007; 62 (2): 109–112. PubMed PMID: 17505693. Epub 2007/05/17. eng.Google Scholar

89. Mouraviev, V, Spiess, PE, Jones, JS. Salvage cryoablation for locally recurrent prostate cancer following primary radiotherapy. EurUrol 2012; 61 (6): 1204–1211. PubMed PMID: 22421081. Epub 2012/03/17. eng.Google Scholar

90. Erinjeri, JP, Clark, TW. Cryoablation: mechanism of action and devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010; 21 (8 Suppl):S187–S91. PubMed PMID: 20656228.Google Scholar

91. Wang, J, Sefah, K, Altman, MB, Chen, T, You, M, Zhao, Z, et al. Aptamer-conjugated nanorods for targeted photothermal therapy of prostate cancer stem cells. Chemistry 2013; 8 (10): 2417–2422. PubMed PMID: 23757285.Google Scholar

92. Gobin, AM, Moon, JJ, West, JL. EphrinA I-targeted nanoshells for photothermal ablation of prostate cancer cells. Int J Nanomedicine 2008; 3 (3): 351–358. PubMed PMID: 18990944. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2626934.Google Scholar

93. Chen, YY, Hossack, T, Woo, H. Long-term results of bipolar radiofrequency needle ablation of the prostate for lower urinary tract symptoms. J Endourol 2011; 25 (5): 837–840. PubMed PMID: 21476862.Google Scholar

94. Jindal, G, Friedman, M, Locklin, J, Wood, BJ. Palliative radiofrequency ablation for recurrent prostate cancer. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 2006; 29 (3): 482–485. PubMed PMID: 16010507. Pubmed Central PMCID: 2386884.Google Scholar

95. Onik, G, Mikus, P, Rubinsky, B. Irreversible electroporation: implications for prostate ablation. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2007; 6 (4): 295–300. PubMed PMID: 17668936.Google Scholar

96. Bower, M, Sherwood, L, Li, Y, Martin, R. Irreversible electroporation of the pancreas: definitive local therapy without systemic effects. J Surg Oncol 2011; 104 (1): 22–28. PubMed PMID: 21360714.Google Scholar

97. Tian, Y, Leung, W, Yue, K, Mak, N. Cell death induced by MPPa-PDT in prostate carcinoma in vitro and in vivo. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2006; 348 (2): 413–420. PubMed PMID: 16889752.Google Scholar

98. Liang, X, Wang, KK, Zhu, TC. Feasibility of interstitial diffuse optical tomography using cylindrical diffusing fibers for prostate PDT. Phys Med Biol 2013; 58 (10): 3461–3480. PubMed PMID: 23629149. Pubmed Central PMCID: 3759155.Google Scholar

99. Song, DY, DeWeese, TL. Can PSA nadir predict prostate cancer outcomes following radiotherapy? Nat Clin Pract Urol 2006; 3 (9): 464–465. PubMed PMID: 16964182.Google Scholar

100. Crouzet, S, Chapelon, JY, Rouviere, O, Mege-Lechevallier, F, Colombel, M, Tonoli-Catez, H, 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. PubMed PMID: 23669165.Google Scholar

101. Roach, M, Hanks, G, Thames, H, Schellhammer, P, Shipley, WU, Sokol, GH, et al. Defining biochemical failure following radiotherapy with or without hormonal therapy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: recommendations of the RTOG-ASTRO Phoenix Consensus Conference. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 65 (4): 965–974.Google Scholar

102. Ganzer, R, Robertson, CN, Ward, JF, Brown, SCW, Conti, GN, Murat, FJ, et al. Correlation of prostate-specific antigen nadir and biochemical failure after high-intensity focused ultrasound of localized prostate cancer based on the Stuttgart failure criteria – analysis from the @-Registry. BJU Int 2011; 108 (8): 196–201.Google Scholar

103. Nguyen, PL, Chen, M-H, D'Amico, AV, Tempany, CM, Steele, GS, Albert, M, et al. Magnetic resonance image-guided salvage brachytherapy after radiation in select men who initially presented with favorable-risk prostate cancer: a prospective phase 2 study. Cancer 2007; 110 (7): 1485–1492.Google Scholar

104. Goldberg, SN, Grassi, CJ, Cardella, JF, Charboneau, JW, Dodd, GD, 3rd, Dupuy, DE, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR. 2009; 20 (7 Suppl): S377–S390. PubMed PMID: 19560026.Google Scholar

105. Robertson, NL, Moore, CM, Ambler, G, Bott, SR, Freeman, A, Gambarota, G, et al. MAPPED study design: a 6 month randomised controlled study to evaluate the effect of dutasteride on prostate cancer volume using magnetic resonance imaging. Contemp Clin Trials 2013; 34 (1): 80–89. PubMed PMID: 23085153.Google Scholar

106. Barret, E, Ahallal, Y, Sanchez-Salas, R, Galiano, M, Cosset, J-M, Validire, P, et al. Morbidity of focal therapy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2013; 63 (4): 618–622.Google Scholar

107. Lindner, U, Trachtenberg, J, Lawrentschuk, N. Focal therapy in prostate cancer: modalities, findings and future considerations. Nat Rev Urol 2010; 7 (10): 562–571.Google Scholar

108. Fegoun, AB El, Barret, E, Prapotnich, D, Soon, S, Cathelineau, X, Rozet, F, et al. Focal therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound for prostate cancer in the elderly. A feasibility study with 10 years follow-up. Int Braz J Urol 2011; 37 (2): 213–219.Google Scholar

109. Ahmed, HU, Freeman, A, Kirkham, A, Sahu, M, Scott, R, Allen, C, et al. Focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: a phase I/II trial. J Urol 2011; 185 (4): 1246–1254.Google Scholar

110. Rabbani, F, Yunis, LH, Pinochet, R, Nogueira, L, Vora, KC, Eastham, JA, et al. Comprehensive standardized report of complications of retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2010; 57 (3): 371–386.Google Scholar

111. Shariat, SF, Raptidis, G, Masatoschi, M, Bergamaschi, F, Slawin, KM. Pilot study of radiofrequency interstitial tumor ablation (RITA) for the treatment of radio-recurrent prostate cancer. Prostate 2005; 65 (3): 260–267.Google Scholar

112. Bahn, D, Castro Abreu, AL de, Gill, IS, Hung, AJ, Silverman, P, Gross, ME, et al. Focal cryotherapy for clinically unilateral, low-intermediate risk prostate cancer in 73 men with a median follow-up of 3.7 years. Eur Urol 2012; 62 (1): 55–63.Google Scholar

113. Moore, CM, Nathan, TR, Lees, WR, Mosse, CA, Freeman, A, Emberton, M, et al. Photodynamic therapy using meso tetra hydroxy phenyl chlorin (mTHPC) in early prostate cancer. Lasers Surg Med 2006; 38 (5): 356–363.Google Scholar

114. Ganzer, R, Fritsche, HM, Brandtner, A, Brundl, J, Koch, D, Wieland, WF, et al. Fourteen-year oncological and functional outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound in localized prostate cancer. BJU Int 2013; 112 (3): 322–329. PubMed PMID: 23356910.Google Scholar

115. 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. PubMed PMID: 21449970.Google Scholar

116. Blana, A, Rogenhofer, S, Ganzer, R, Lunz, JC, Schostak, M, Wieland, WF, et al. Eight years’ experience with high-intensity focused ultrasonography for treatment of localized prostate cancer. Urology 2008; 72 (6): 1329–1333; discussion 33–34. PubMed PMID: 18829078.Google Scholar

117. Blana, A, Murat, FJ, Walter, B, Thuroff, S, Wieland, WF, Chaussy, C, et al. First analysis of the long-term results with transrectal HIFU in patients with localised prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2008; 53 (6): 1194–1201. PubMed PMID: 17997026.Google Scholar

118. Cheetham, P, Truesdale, M, Chaudhury, S, Wenske, S, Hruby, GW, Katz, A. Long-term cancer-specific and overall survival for men followed more than 10 years after primary and salvage cryoablation of the prostate. J Endourol 2010; 24 (7): 1123–1129. PubMed PMID: 20575687.Google Scholar

119. Onik, G, Vaughan, D, Lotenfoe, R, Dineen, M, Brady, J. The “male lumpectomy”: focal therapy for prostate cancer using cryoablation results in 48 patients with at least 2-year follow-up. Urol Oncol 2008; 26 (5): 500–505.Google Scholar

120. Bahn, DK, Lee, F, Badalament, R, Kumar, A, Greski, J, Chernick, M. Targeted cryoablation of the prostate: 7-year outcomes in the primary treatment of prostate cancer. Urology 2002; 60 (2 Suppl 1): 3–11. PubMed PMID: 12206842.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.