PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9676539

Prostate cryoablation: update 1998.

Abstract

Transrectal ultrasound-guided percutaneous transperineal prostate cryoablation has many attractive features both to the patient and to the urologist. The procedure typically can be done in a period of 2 hours or less on an outpatient basis with minimal blood loss and with the patient under regional or general anesthesia. With more experience in using the equipment and the techniques described, urologists can treat all stages of localized prostate cancer with relatively little morbidity. The results of this technique in the treatment of prostate cancer continue to appear promising. With follow-up of 5 years or more available in several series, cryoablation appears to be an effective modality for the eradication of localized prostate cancer, particularly low-volume cancer (PSA less than 10 ng/ml and Gleason score less than 7). Improved results, i.e., undetectable postcryoablation PSA levels and negative biopsies, may occur with modifications such as double freezing and pullback apical freezing. However, the complication rate also may increase with increased tissue destruction. To date, most complications reported have been relatively minor and require limited intervention. Notably, complications, especially incontinence, are significantly greater, in spite of successful eradication of residual tumor, in patients who undergo salvage cryoablation for recurrent disease after radiation therapy. In our experience, transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate cryoablation appears to be effective in controlling local prostate cancer in 81% of patients with minimal morbidity. As with radical prostatectomy and irradiation techniques, longer follow-up is required; however, at this time prostate cryosurgery can be considered in the following situations: as a primary treatment alternative to surgery or irradiation, as salvage treatment for recurrent cancer after irradiation, and for debulking of large symptomatic primary tumors. We look forward to the prospective randomized clinical trial comparing prostate cryoablation with external irradiation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J D Schmidt, J Doyle, S Larison. Prostate cryoablation: update 1998.. https://doi.org/10.3322/canjclin.48.4.239

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Hemangiomas.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Cryosurgery↗

Evaluation of cooling methods for laser dermatology.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Skin cooling is used to protect the epidermis in a variety of laser dermatology procedures, including leg vein treatment, hair removal, and port wine stain removal. Spray and contact cooling are the two most popular methods, but similarities and differences of these techniques are not well understood. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS: A theoretical model of skin cooling is presented for two different regimens: "soft" cooling in which freezing of the skin is not permitted and "hard" cooling in which the skin can be frozen to a given depth. Spray and contact cooling were also compared experimentally using an in vitro model. RESULTS: For a fixed skin surface temperature, spray and contact cooling theoretically produce the same cooling profile in the skin. Anatomic depth of cooling depends on the time for which either the spray or contact is applied. In vitro experiments caused temperature at the simulated basal layer to be between -5 and +5 degrees C for both spray (tetrafluoroethane, boiling point -26 degrees C) and contact (-27 degrees C sapphire plate) cooling. The theoretical precooling analysis shows hard mode to be faster and more selective than soft mode; however, cooling time for hard mode must be carefully controlled to prevent irreversible epidermal damage caused by freezing. CONCLUSIONS: Both spray and contact cooling provide efficient skin cooling. The choice of cooling method depends on other factors such as the target depth, cost, safety, and ergonomic factors.

Cryosurgery↗

Peripheral retinal ablation for threshold retinopathy of prematurity in preterm infants.

BACKGROUND: This section is under preparation and will be included in the next issue. OBJECTIVES: In premature infants with threshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) does peripheral retinal ablation, by any means, reduce the incidence of adverse ophthalmic outcome? SEARCH STRATEGY: The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. This included a search of the Cochrane Neonatal Group Register of Clinical Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, previous reviews including cross references, abstracts from pediatric and ophthalmologic meetings, letters and expert informants. Search terms included "Retinopathy of Prematurity" [MeSH Terms], "Retrolental Fibroplasia" [All Fields] and "Lightcoagulation" [All Fields] or "Cryosurgery" [All Fields]. In addition, a personal bibliographic database was used as a cross-reference. SELECTION CRITERIA: All trials in human premature infants with threshold ROP utilizing random or quasi random allocation to either peripheral retinal ablation of the avascular retina, by any means, or concurrent control group with independent outcome assessment were initially selected for review. Following methodologic review, only studies using random allocation were selected for data extraction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Relevance and validity were assessed by the two authors and consensus reached. Each author extracted clinical outcomes from valid reports independently. Data analysis was conducted according to the standards of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. MAIN RESULTS: Two randomised trials were identified. Data from these studies show that peripheral retinal ablation reduces the risk of (1) early unfavorable retinal structure from 47. 9% to 28.1% (absolute risk reduction 19.8% [95% CI 27.9 - 11.8%]), (2) unfavorable retinal structure in early childhood from 44.3% to 26.3% (absolute risk reduction 18% [95% CI 27.0 - 9.1%]) and (3) unfavorable visual acuity in early childhood from 63% to 50.6% (absolute risk reduction 12.2% [95% CI 21.2 - 3.1]). In addition, visual fields in sighted eyes were slightly smaller in the treated (51.3 degrees +/- 11.8 degrees ) group as compared to the control (58.2 degrees +/- 14.5 degrees ) group. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral retinal ablation reduces the incidence of adverse ophthalmic outcome in premature infants with threshold ROP. In sighted eyes, peripheral retinal ablation may reduce the size of the visual field. At this stage, long term outcomes remain unknown.

Cryosurgery↗