The use of HIFU and cryotherapy is currently unjustified
HIFU (high intensity focussed ultrasound) and cryotherapy are not adequate treatment alternatives in the therapy of the locally limited prostate carcinoma HIFU (high intensity focussed ultrasound), as well as cryotherapy are not adequate treatment alternatives in the therapy of the locally limited prostate carcinoma, according to the new prostate carcinoma guideline, which was recently published by the German Society for Prostate Cancer. According to the experts' consensus, there is no study data available to justify the use of both treatment methods.
Both HIFU and cryotherapy are experimental procedures that are still in the trial phase. Overall, there are very few publications and low patient numbers for both methods. While the longest follow-up period for HIFU therapy is only 27 months1, the number of patients currently receiving cryotherapy is less than 100 patients per year. The data situation therefore does not permit a reliable assessment of the efficacy and safety as well as the healing rates of the two treatment methods, the experts sum up.
- Poissonnier L, Chapelon JY, Rouviere O, Curiel L, Bouvier R, Martin X, Dubernard JM, Gelet A. Control of Prostate Cancer by Transrectal HIFU in 227 Patients. Eur Urol 2007;51 (2): 381-7. ms, according to the new prostate cancer guideline recently presented by the German Society of Urology (DGU).