DE Luca Stefano, Checcucci Enrico, Piramide Federico, Russo Filippo, Alessio Paolo, Garrou Diletta, Peretti Dario, Sica Michele, Volpi Gabriele, Piana Alberto, DE Cillis Sabrina, Amparore Daniele, Manfredi Matteo, Fiori Cristian, Porpiglia Francesco
Division of Urology, Department of Oncology, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Turin, Italy.
Department of Surgery, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, Candiolo, Turin, Italy.
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2023 Apr;75(2):172-179. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.22.04853-4. Epub 2022 Oct 26.
The aim of this paper was to compare safety and functional outcomes of total, hemi and focal ablation by the latest focal high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) device.
This is a prospective study including patients with low to intermediate-risk PCa treated with HIFU by Focal One device from 11/2018 to 3/2020. Before the treatment all patients underwent mp-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and subsequent MRI/transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) fusion and standard biopsy. Patients were stratified according to the type of ablation: total, hemi- or focal ablation. Functional data (IPSS, Quality of Life [QoL], IIEF-5, maximum flow [Qmax] and post void residual [PVR] at flowmetry) were assessed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment. Moreover, the urinary symptoms reported by patients at IPSS questionnaire were divided in "irritative" and "obstructive" and compared.
One hundred patients were enrolled. Median prostate volume and lesion diameter were 46 (IQR 25-75) mL and 10 (IQR 6-13) mm. 15, 50 and 35 patients underwent total, hemi- and focal ablation, respectively. No differences were found between them except for operative time (lower in the focal group, P<0.01). Significant lower incidence of irritative symptoms was identified in the focal group compared to the others (P<0.05 at 1 and 3 months of follow-up). No differences were found among the baseline status and the postoperative assessment in terms of obstructive IPSS items, IIEF-5, QoL, Qmax and PVR (all P value>0.05).
Our study suggests that patients' specific HIFU tailoring with the MRI/real-time TRUS Guidance by Focal One device is able to minimize the side effects of treatment.
本文旨在比较使用最新的聚焦高强度聚焦超声(HIFU)设备进行全消融、半消融和局部消融的安全性和功能结果。
这是一项前瞻性研究,纳入了2018年11月至2020年3月期间使用Focal One设备接受HIFU治疗的低至中度风险前列腺癌患者。治疗前,所有患者均接受多参数磁共振成像(mp-MRI)检查,随后进行MRI/经直肠超声(TRUS)融合及标准活检。患者根据消融类型进行分层:全消融、半消融或局部消融。术前及治疗后1、3、6和12个月评估功能数据(国际前列腺症状评分[IPSS]、生活质量[QoL]、国际勃起功能指数-5[IIEF-5]、最大尿流率[Qmax]及尿流动力学检查中的残余尿量[PVR])。此外,将患者在IPSS问卷中报告的尿路症状分为“刺激性”和“梗阻性”并进行比较。
共纳入100例患者。前列腺体积中位数和病变直径分别为46(四分位间距25 - 75)mL和10(四分位间距6 - 13)mm。分别有15例、50例和35例患者接受了全消融、半消融和局部消融。除手术时间外(局部消融组较低,P<0.01),其余方面差异均无统计学意义。与其他组相比,局部消融组刺激性症状的发生率显著较低(随访1个月和3个月时P<0.05)。在梗阻性IPSS项目、IIEF-5、QoL、Qmax和PVR方面,基线状态与术后评估之间差异均无统计学意义(所有P值>0.05)。
我们的研究表明,使用Focal One设备通过MRI/实时TRUS引导对患者进行特定的HIFU治疗方案能够使治疗副作用最小化。