2016
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4491-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can pre- and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging predict recurrence-free survival after whole-gland high-intensity focused ablation for prostate cancer?

Abstract: • The size of the MR-dominant lesion significantly influences post-HIFU recurrence-free survival. • The destruction score of the MR-dominant lesion predicts post-HIFU recurrence-free survival. • Patients with a completely devascularized MR-dominant lesion show better recurrence-free survival • Pre- and post-HIFU MRI provide prognostic information independent of usual predictors.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Within targeted regions, the 3-week radiological and histological treatment efficacies were determined using 3-level structured destruction score classifications [12]. For MRI destruction scores, targeted regions completely included within the NPV without focal enhancement were classified as successful treatment (score 0), targeted regions not totally included within the NPV as targeting failure (score 1) and targeted regions within the NPV but demonstrating residual focal enhancement as ablative failure (score 2).…”
Section: Determination Of Treatment Efficacymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Within targeted regions, the 3-week radiological and histological treatment efficacies were determined using 3-level structured destruction score classifications [12]. For MRI destruction scores, targeted regions completely included within the NPV without focal enhancement were classified as successful treatment (score 0), targeted regions not totally included within the NPV as targeting failure (score 1) and targeted regions within the NPV but demonstrating residual focal enhancement as ablative failure (score 2).…”
Section: Determination Of Treatment Efficacymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As opposed to a series of brief small volume exposures in HIFU, directional ultrasound has distinct patterns of thermal dose and temperature deposition and subsequent tissue damage due to the use of continuous heating with an unfocused ultrasound beam. The ablated volume is visualized post-treatment on contrast enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) as a non-perfused-volume (NPV) indicating complete cell death [10][11][12]. Target tissue undergoes acute coagulation necrosis [13], followed by delayed necrosis, which is mainly dependent on cumulative thermal dose [14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared with light irradiation, the scattering of ultrasound in tissue is much weaker; thus it can penetrate much deeper without energy loss [22]. What is more, it can activate the sensitizers at their focal point with high spatial precision [18,23,24]. Nevertheless, little attention has been paid to the enhancement of its overall sonodynamic efficiency by considering quantum yield or tumor target ability.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To release the therapeutic cargo, a localised temperature increase by an externally controllable heat source such as high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) or electrocauterisation is a promising trigger, allowing for a defined and well-controlled temperature increase at a specific location in a non- or minimally invasive fashion [22, 23]. HIFU, for instance, is clinically used for heat-induced tumour ablation with high spatial accuracy and a predefined target temperature [24, 25]. Moreover, it is generally combined with imaging modalities such as MRI or ultrasound in order to determine the exact localisation of the target lesions and to target the HIFU pulse [2628].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%