Focal Salvage MR Imaging–Guided Cryoablation for Localized Prostate Cancer Recurrence after Radiotherapy: 12-Month Follow-up

• Published in: Journal of vascular and interventional radiology Vol. 31; no. 1; pp. 35 - 41
• Main Authors: Bomers, Joyce G.R., Overduin, Christiaan G., Jenniskens, Sjoerd F.M., Cornel, Erik B., van Lin, Emile N.J.T., Sedelaar, J.P. Michiel, Fütterer, Jurgen J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.01.2020
• Subjects: SRP; IPSS; FACT-P; ICIQ-SF; IIEF-5; PCa; PSA; QoL
• ISSN: 1051-0443; 1535-7732
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.07.001

To evaluate safety, quality of life (QoL), and local cancer control after focal salvage MR imaging–guided cryoablation in patients with local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) after radiotherapy. A retrospective, single-center study was performed in 62 patients with radiorecurrent PCa who underwent MR imaging–guided cryoablation since May 2011 with a follow-up ≥12 months in December 2017. Rates and descriptions of adverse events were reported. Ablation complications were classified according to the Clavien and SIR systems. Validated questionnaires were used to observe functional outcomes and QoL before therapy and 6 and 12 months after therapy. Cancer control was defined as no biochemical failure according to Phoenix criteria and no other clinical evidence for local or metastatic disease. All procedures were technically feasible. The number of complications requiring major therapy (Clavien grade 3b/4 or SIR grade D/E/F) was low (2 [3.2%] and 1 [1.6%], respectively). After 12 months, the International Consultation of Incontinence Questionnaire–Short Form (P < .001) and 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (P = .001) scores became significantly worse, indicating increased symptoms of incontinence and diminished erectile function, without compromising QoL. Six patients developed metastases within 6 months. After 12 months, 36 patients (63%) were disease-free. Focal salvage MR imaging–guided cryoablation is safe and is associated with a high technical success rate, preservation of QoL, and local PCa control. This treatment can be a reasonable alternative to salvage radical prostatectomy in properly selected patients with low morbidity and preservation of QoL; however, longer follow-up is needed.