Focal Cryotherapy vs RARP

Posted by happydappy @happydappy, 2 days ago

I'm diagnosed GG 2 and MRI and biopsy indicated that the cancer is located in one lesion near the prostate capsule. Being treated at a university center of excellence. SBRT may not be best for me due to non cancer related urinary issues as radiation could make it worse. Surgeon offered RARP or focal cryotherapy. He's experienced with both. He said focal therapy, while having less side effects, does not have the long term success rates as prostatectomy. What are other's experiences with making this decision or having cryotherapy?

Interested in more discussions like this? Go to the Prostate Cancer Support Group.

Yes, each technique has pros and cons. Some work better for certain placement of lesion inside the prostate. Also, if lesion is close to anal opening it can be tricky to have focal radiation in that spot. They use special "spacers" in that scenario but it still can cause anal irritation and possibly long term proctitis.

REPLY
@surftohealth88

Just wanted to say that we were informed that TULSA can be successful only if cancer is close to urethra, not if it is on outer edges of prostate.

Also, we were informed that any localized therapy is almost never curative, it just removes cancer from that particular part of prostate gland and one has to continue with AS, inclooding having biopsy every year or two. But, it can be a valid choice if somebody knows all of the risks and details and still can not imagine doing RP or RT at this point.

Jump to this post

I had Tulsa, so I know the distance can be up to 3 cm, ideally less than 3 cm. But 3 cm in all directions from urethra is the distance, and of course it can't be outside the prostate. 3 cm is pretty big, so many people are handled by Tulsa, some are not. Original poster of this thread not seeking it though, as one does have to travel usually.

REPLY
Please sign in or register to post a reply.