1028: Efficacy of Local High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) in Localized Prostate Cancer

High‐intensity focused ultrasound in prostate cancer; a systematic literature review of the French Association of Urology

“…Therefore, it is difficult to estimate the total number of patients treated with both devices. Most studies with the Ablatherm device included 100–200 patients, one large multicentre study included 402 [16] and some of the recent abstracts included up to 969 patients [14]. The studies with the Sonablate device included 63–250 patients.…”

“…1). Studies differentiating low/intermediate‐risk (LR) and high‐risk (HR) patients reported a higher negative prostate biopsy rate in LR than HR patients [10,11,14]. There was no statistically significant difference in negative prostate biopsy rate between patients receiving HIFU alone or a combination of TURP and HIFU [36].…”

“…Therefore, it was decided for this review to focus on HIFU as primary therapy for prostate cancer. Considering this, 25 articles/ abstracts evaluating HIFU with the Ablatherm [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] and five with the Sonablate device were selected [23][24][25][26][27].…”

“…In all, 37 articles/abstracts of studies evaluating the efficacy and/or safety of HIFU in prostate cancer were selected [5–41]. Data on HIFU as salvage therapy after RT were limited; only two fully published papers and five abstracts were identified [28–34].…”