Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided Cryoablation of Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Radical Prostatectomy: Initial Single Institution Experience

OBJECTIVE To establish the feasibility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided cryoablation in patients with previous radical prostatectomy and MRI visualized biopsy-proven local recurrence of prostate adenocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eighteen postprostatectomy patients (mean 67, 57-78 years) were treated with MRI-guided cryoablation for recurrent prostate carcinoma. Patients were found to have a hyperenhancing nodule using multiparametric MRI with endorectal coil followed by a positive transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Of 18 postsurgical patients, 6 had additional salvage external beam radiation with subsequent recurrence. Under general anesthesia and MRI guidance (wide-bore 1.5T MRI), 2-5 cryotherapy probes were placed in or around the recurrence by transperineal approach and cryoablation performed. The patients were stratified into 2 groups: the initial 9 consecutive patients had cryoprobes placed 1 cm apart with 2 freeze-thaw cycles (group 1), and the subsequent 9 patients had cryoprobes placed 0.5 cm apart with 3 freeze-thaw cycles (group 2). RESULTS In group I, the average preprocedure prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 1.21 +/- 1.12 ng/mL, and 1-3 months postprocedure PSA was 0.14 +/- 0.11 ng/mL (P < .01). Sixty-seven percent of patients had PSA <= 0.2 ng/mL at 1-3 months follow-up, but only 25% at 4-6 months. No change in impotence or incontinence occurred. In group II, average preprocedure PSA was 2.24 +/- 2.71 ng/mL, and 1-3 month postprocedure PSA was 0.08 +/- 0.10 ng/mL (P < .05). Eighty-nine percent of patients had PSA <= 0.2 ng/mL at 1-3 months follow-up and at 4-6 months. Complications in group 2 included worsening incontinence in 3 patients. CONCLUSION MRI-guided salvage cryoablation of postradical prostatectomy prostate cancer recurrence is safe and feasible. Both techniques produce early PSA decrease with more lasting PSA results in the more aggressive group II methodology. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc.