Home » Patients » Ablatherm
vs. HIFU: The Data
Ablatherm vs Sonablate (Page 7 of 8)
Show Me the Data!
In comparison to other cancers, prostate cancer progresses relatively
slowly. This certainly doesn’t mean it can be ignored,
but it does mean that it takes many years for a treatment to
become established. Generally, patients need to be followed for
at least five years before it is possible to pass judgment on
whether or not a treatment really works well.
There are several long term studies published in medical journals
with mean follow-ups in excess of five years available for patients
treated with the Ablatherm. The data in these studies is used
by physicians to justify their use of the procedure. There are
no long term follow-ups of patients treated with the Sonoblate
500, and the longest studies available are still only from one
source and have not been substantiated.
One study involves a multi-center experience with the Sonoblate
500 with 18 month results which was presented at the USHIFU 2005
User's Group Meeting which was part of the 15th International
Prostate Cancer Conference, Vail, Colorado in February 2005.
The named presenters and/or authors of the study were Drs. George
Suarez, Raphael Estrella, and Carlos Garcia. Eighty-seven patients
with T-1 or T-2 prostate cancer were included in the study, and
each of them had a Gleason score of 7 or less and a PSA of 10
or less. Of the 87 patients treated 70 maintained a PSA of nadir
but 17 patients (20%) had PSAs which persisted between 1 and
2ng/ml. This presumpted failure rate of 20% is of great concern
because none of these patients had high risk prostate cancer.
Another study using the Sonablate 500 was published in December
2007. An analysis of those results can be found here.
|
