Has anyone had TULSA?

I had Tulsa, I would call it something just about anyone can handle. And if for some reason it fails, you can always get another treatment. I have no side effects from Tulsa, a few weeks in a catheter was only thing to handle.
https://connect.mayoclinic.org/discussion/tulsa-pro-initial-experience/

Having had surgery and subsequent psa failure why not do Tulsa and see what happens? Or another Tulsa if it doesn’t get it all surgery seldom gets it all either. You may retain more continence and sexual function.

Side note: I still find it weird that the procedure is called "TULSA-Pro" when it was developed in Toronto. I know it stands for "Transurethral Ultrasound Ablation", but it sounds like it should have come from Oklahoma, not Ontario. 🙂

I did Tulsa last year. Could not have been easier and I remain happy with my decision. My story:
https://connect.mayoclinic.org/discussion/tulsa-pro-experience-mayo-clinic-mn-july-2024/

I have a 3+4 Gleason, and recently met with a leading provider of TULSA treatment to discuss the options. Here were my "takeaways". TULSA is not ideal if the area of the cancer is not well-defined. The location of the cancer in the prostate, if succinctly defined, is also a factor. As you probably know, TULSA uses heat to remove the area of cancer and a margin around it. If the area is not well-defined, this is an issue. Also, the closer to the rectum the cancer is, the less ideal, as TULSA uses a cooling device to protect the rectum, and cooling of the area is counterproductive to the heating of the tissue to remove the cancer. As I understand it, this can lead to less than ideal outcomes. I am not a healthcare professional, so please take this information with the appropriate caution.

I have done exhaustive research on this since I am a gleason 4+3 in 2 of 12 cores. I did NOT qualify for Tulsa due to calcium deposits in my prostate. Needless to say I was very disappointed after going to all the trouble to get in the Mayo clinic. I am now pursuing IRE NanoKnife at Moffitt Cancer center. After all of my research, Tulsa Pro and IRE are the only way to go if you qualify. Very little disruption of your life and very low side effects if any, for only a slightly higher risk of recurrence. The risk of recurrence is 25%+ at 5 years across all methods of treatment and approaches 50% at 10 years for all methods. This depends somewhat on your decipher score and other factors. However, after 15 years, only 3% of deaths are due to prostate cancer. So why not do a less invasive procedure to start. You can always advance to RP, radiation or do Tulsa or IRE a second time.

I have calcium deposits but my doctor is going to remove them in the early stages of the treatment…

really want to avoid radiation in the first step of treatment..

I had the TULSA procedure last October in Los Angeles. My pre TULSA scan showed some calcium deposits, but further consultation confirmed that the relative positions of the deposits and my tumors would allow the procedure. Now 9 months later MRI and PSA tests indicate that my TULSA treatment was successful with virtually no side effects.

I'm finding treatment proposals are different from doctor to doctor. My doctor simply said he could not do Tulsa Pro due to calcium deposits, which per the CT were small, mostly on the opposite side of the tumors? I'm going to Moffitt for an IRE consult, which will be my 5th physician.