Deutsch (DE-CH-AT)English (United Kingdom)

HIFU and Cryotherapy are currently not justified

HIFU (high intensity focused ultrasound), as well as cryotherapy prove not to be adequate alternatives for the treatment of localized prostate carcinoma. These are the latest findings in the new Prostate Carcinoma Guideline that was recently introduced by the German Society for Urology (DGU). The consensus of the experts is that to date there are no study results that justify these two therapies.
HIFU as well as cryotherapy are experimental procedures, which are still in their trial phases. Overall, both methods are documented in only a few publications, and a relatively low number of case studies. While the longest post-observation time for the HIFU therapy stretches over a period of only 27 months1, the number of patients receiving crotherapy is currently less than 100. Experts conclude that in view of the low number of case studies, the recovery rate of either method cannot be judged satisfactorily.


1Poissonnier 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
  • PDF
  • Print
  • E-mail