1
|
Patel KR, Rydzewski NR, Schott E, Cooley-Zgela T, Ning H, Cheng J, Salerno K, Huang EP, Pinto PA, Lindenberg L, Mena E, Choyke P, Turkbey B, Citrin DE. A Phase 1 Trial of Focal Salvage Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Radiorecurrent Prostate Cancer. Pract Radiat Oncol 2023; 13:540-550. [PMID: 37442430 PMCID: PMC10782822 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.05.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Revised: 04/24/2023] [Accepted: 05/06/2023] [Indexed: 07/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE NCT03253744 was a phase 1 trial to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of image-guided, focal, salvage stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for patients with locally radiorecurrent prostate cancer. Additional objectives included biochemical control and imaging response. METHODS AND MATERIALS The trial design included 3 dose levels (DLs): 40 Gy (DL1), 42.5 Gy (DL2), and 45 Gy (DL3) in 5 fractions delivered ≥48 hours apart. The prescription dose was delivered to the magnetic resonance- and prostate-specific membrane antigen imaging-defined tumor volume. Dose escalation followed a 3+3 design with a 3-patient expansion at the MTD. Toxicities were scored until 2 years after completion of SBRT using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 5.0, criteria. Escalation was halted if 2 dose-limiting toxicities occurred, defined as any persistent (>4 days) grade 3 toxicity occurring within the first 3 weeks after SBRT and any grade 3 genitourinary (GU) or grade 4 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity thereafter. RESULTS Between August 2018 and May 2022, 8 patients underwent salvage focal SBRT, with a median follow-up of 35 months. No dose-limiting toxic effects were observed on DL1. Two patients were enrolled in DL2 and experienced grade 3 GU toxicities, prompting de-escalation and expansion (n = 6) at the MTD (DL1). The most common toxicities observed were grade ≥2 GU toxicities, with only a single grade 2 GI toxicity and no grade ≥3 GI toxicities. One patient experienced biochemical failure (prostate-specific antigen nadir + 2.0) at 33 months. CONCLUSIONS The MTD for focal salvage SBRT for isolated intraprostatic radiorecurrence was 40 Gy in 5 fractions, producing a 100% 24-month biochemical progression free survival, with 1 poststudy failure at 33 months. The most frequent clinically significant toxicity was late grade ≥2 GU toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krishnan R Patel
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland.
| | - Nicholas R Rydzewski
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erica Schott
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Theresa Cooley-Zgela
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Holly Ning
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Jason Cheng
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Kilian Salerno
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Erich P Huang
- Biometric Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Rockville, Maryland
| | - Peter A Pinto
- Urologic Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Liza Lindenberg
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Esther Mena
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Peter Choyke
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Baris Turkbey
- Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Deborah E Citrin
- Radiation Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Orozco Scott P, Deshpande P, Abramson M. Genitourinary Cancer: Updates on Treatments and Their Impact on the Kidney. Semin Nephrol 2023; 42:151344. [PMID: 37172546 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2023.151344] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/15/2023]
Abstract
Genitourinary cancers are diverse in their presentation, prevalence, and mortality risk. Although there have been significant advancements in medical (eg, immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors) and surgical treatments of genitourinary cancers, patients are still at risk for chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and electrolyte derangements in the short and long term. In addition, pre-existing kidney disease may increase the risk of developing some genitourinary cancers. This review focuses on the kidney-related effects of treatments for renal cell carcinoma and bladder and prostate cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paloma Orozco Scott
- Department of Internal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Medical School, New York, NY.
| | - Priya Deshpande
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Matthew Abramson
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Groen VH, van Schie M, Zuithoff NPA, Monninkhof EM, Kunze-Busch M, de Boer JCJ, van der Voort van Zijp J, Pos FJ, Smeenk RJ, Haustermans K, Isebaert S, Draulans C, Depuydt T, Verkooijen HM, van der Heide UA, Kerkmeijer LGW. Urethral and bladder dose-effect relations for late genitourinary toxicity following external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer in the FLAME trial. Radiother Oncol 2021; 167:127-132. [PMID: 34968470 DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.12.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2021] [Revised: 12/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE or objectives The FLAME trial (NCT01168479) showed that by adding a focal boost to conventional fractionated EBRT in the treatment of localized prostate cancer, the five-year biochemical disease-free survival increased, without significantly increasing toxicity. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between radiation dose to the bladder and urethra and genitourinary (GU) toxicity grade ≥2 in the entire cohort. MATERIAL AND METHODS The dose-effect relations of the urethra and bladder dose, separately, and GU toxicity grade ≥2 (CTCAE 3.0) up to five years after treatment were assessed. A mixed model analysis for repeated measurements was used, adjusting for age, diabetes mellitus, T-stage, baseline GU toxicity grade ≥1 and institute. Additionally, the association between the dose and separate GU toxicity subdomains were investigated. RESULTS Dose-effect relations were observed for the dose (Gy) to the bladder D2cm3 and urethra D0.1cm3, with adjusted odds ratios of 1.14 (95% CI 1.12-1.16, p<0.0001) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.11-1.14, p<0.0001), respectively. Additionally, associations between the dose to the urethra and bladder and the subdomains urinary frequency, urinary retention and urinary incontinence were observed. CONCLUSION Further increasing the dose to the bladder and urethra will result in a significant increase in GU toxicity following EBRT. Focal boost treatment plans should incorporate a urethral dose-constraint. Further treatment optimization to increase the focal boost dose without increasing the dose to the urethra and other organs at risk should be a focus for future research, as we have shown that a focal boost is beneficial in the treatment of prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veerle H Groen
- University Medical Center Utrecht, Radiation Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel van Schie
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nicolaas P A Zuithoff
- University Medical Center, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Evelyn M Monninkhof
- University Medical Center, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Martina Kunze-Busch
- Radboud University Medical Center, Radiation Oncology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Floris J Pos
- The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Robert Jan Smeenk
- Radboud University Medical Center, Radiation Oncology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Sofie Isebaert
- University Hospitals Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Cédric Draulans
- University Hospitals Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Tom Depuydt
- University Hospitals Leuven, Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | | | - Linda G W Kerkmeijer
- University Medical Center Utrecht, Radiation Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands; Radboud University Medical Center, Radiation Oncology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wang K, Mavroidis P, Royce TJ, Falchook AD, Collins SP, Sapareto S, Sheets NC, Fuller DB, El Naqa I, Yorke E, Grimm J, Jackson A, Chen RC. Prostate Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy: An Overview of Toxicity and Dose Response. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2020; 110:237-248. [PMID: 33358229 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.09.054] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2020] [Accepted: 09/26/2020] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Ultrahypofractionationed radiation therapy for prostate cancer is increasingly studied and adopted. The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Working Group on Biological Effects of Hypofractionated Radiotherapy therefore aimed to review studies examining toxicity and quality of life after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for prostate cancer and model its effect. METHODS AND MATERIALS We performed a systematic PubMed search of prostate SBRT studies published between 2001 and 2018. Those that analyzed factors associated with late urinary, bowel, or sexual toxicity and/or quality of life were included and reviewed. Normal tissue complication probability modelling was performed on studies that contained detailed dose/volume and outcome data. RESULTS We found 13 studies that examined urinary effects, 6 that examined bowel effects, and 4 that examined sexual effects. Most studies included patients with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer treated to 35-40 Gy. Most patients were treated with 5 fractions, with several centers using 4 fractions. Endpoints were heterogeneous and included both physician-scored toxicity and patient-reported quality of life. Most toxicities were mild-moderate (eg, grade 1-2) with a very low overall incidence of severe toxicity (eg, grade 3 or higher, usually <3%). Side effects were associated with both dosimetric and non-dosimetric factors. CONCLUSIONS Prostate SBRT appears to be overall well tolerated, with determinants of toxicity that include dosimetric factors and patient factors. Suggested dose constraints include bladder V(Rx Dose)Gy <5-10 cc, urethra Dmax <38-42 Gy, and rectum Dmax <35-38 Gy, though current data do not offer firm guidance on tolerance doses. Several areas for future research are suggested.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyle Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Panayiotis Mavroidis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | - Trevor J Royce
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | - Sean P Collins
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC
| | - Stephen Sapareto
- Department of Medical Physics, Banner Health System, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Nathan C Sheets
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
| | | | - Issam El Naqa
- Department of Machine Learning, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida
| | - Ellen Yorke
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Jimm Grimm
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania; Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Andrew Jackson
- Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
| | - Ronald C Chen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Panettieri V, Rancati T, Onjukka E, Ebert MA, Joseph DJ, Denham JW, Steigler A, Millar JL. External Validation of a Predictive Model of Urethral Strictures for Prostate Patients Treated With HDR Brachytherapy Boost. Front Oncol 2020; 10:910. [PMID: 32596153 PMCID: PMC7300245 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00910] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2020] [Accepted: 05/11/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: For prostate cancer treatment, comparable or superior biochemical control was reported when using External-Beam-Radiotherapy (EBRT) with High-Dose-Rate-Brachytherapy (HDRB)-boost, compared to dose-escalation with EBRT alone. The conformal doses produced by HDRB could allow further beneficial prostate dose-escalation, but increase in dose is limited by normal tissue toxicity. Previous works showed correlation between urethral dose and incidence of urinary toxicity, but there is a lack of established guidelines on the dose constraints to this organ. This work aimed at fitting a Normal-Tissue-Complication-Probability model to urethral stricture data collected at one institution and validating it with an external cohort, looking at neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation as dose-modifying factor. Materials and Methods: Clinical and dosimetric data of 258 patients, with a toxicity rate of 12.8%, treated at a single institution with a variety of prescription doses, were collected to fit the Lyman–Kutcher–Burman (LKB) model using the maximum likelihood method. Due to the different fractionations, doses were converted into 2 Gy-equivalent doses (α/β = 5 Gy), and urethral stricture was used as an end-point. For validation, an external cohort of 187 patients treated as part of the TROG (Trans Tasman Radiation Oncology Group) 03.04 RADAR trial with a toxicity rate of 8.7%, was used. The goodness of fit was assessed using calibration plots. The effect of neo-adjuvant androgen deprivation (AD) was analyzed separating patients who had received it prior to treatment from those who did not receive it. Results: The obtained LKB parameters were TD50 = 116.7 Gy and m = 0.23; n was fixed to 0.3, based on numerical optimization of the likelihood. The calibration plot showed a good agreement between the observed toxicity and the probability predicted by the model, confirmed by bootstrapping. For the external validation, the calibration plot showed that the observed toxicity obtained with the RADAR patients was well-represented by the fitted LKB model parameters. When patients were stratified by the use of AD TD50 decreased when AD was not present. Conclusions: Lyman–Kutcher–Burman model parameters were fitted to the risk of urethral stricture and externally validated with an independent cohort, to provide guidance on urethral tolerance doses for patients treated with a HDRB boost. For patients that did not receive AD, model fitting provided a lower TD50 suggesting a protective effect on urethra toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vanessa Panettieri
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Tiziana Rancati
- Prostate Cancer Program, Scientific Directorate, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy
| | - Eva Onjukka
- Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Martin A Ebert
- Radiation Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, WA, Australia.,School of Physics, Mathematics and Computing, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.,5D Clinics, Claremont, WA, Australia
| | - David J Joseph
- 5D Clinics, Claremont, WA, Australia.,GenesisCare, Subiaco, WA, Australia.,School of Surgery, University of Western Australia, WA, Australia
| | - James W Denham
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | - Allison Steigler
- School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | - Jeremy L Millar
- Alfred Health Radiation Oncology, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Makishima H, Ishikawa H, Tanaka K, Mori Y, Mizumoto M, Ohnishi K, Aihara T, Fukumitsu N, Okumura T, Sakurai H. A retrospective study of late adverse events in proton beam therapy for prostate cancer. Mol Clin Oncol 2017; 7:547-552. [PMID: 29046789 PMCID: PMC5639311 DOI: 10.3892/mco.2017.1372] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2017] [Accepted: 08/03/2017] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
The efficacy and safety of proton beam therapy (PBT) were retrospectively evaluated in 111 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who underwent definitive PBT between 2008 and 2012. Following exclusion of 18 patients due to treatment suspension, loss to follow-up, and histology, the analysis included 93 patients with a median age of 68 years (range, 49–81 years). A total of 7, 32 and 54 prostate cancer patients were classified as low-, intermediate- and high-risk, respectively, as follows: High-risk, T≥3a or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ≥20 ng/ml or Gleason Score ≥8; low-risk, T ≤2b and PSA≤10 ng/ml and Gleason Score=6; intermediate-risk, all other combinations. The median initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 9.75 ng/ml (range, 1.4–100 ng/ml) and the median Gleason score was 7 (range, 6–10). Patients with low-risk disease received 74 GyE (relative biological effectiveness=1.1) in 37 fractions, and those at intermediate or higher risk received 78 GyE in 39 fractions. Complete androgen blockade (CAB) therapy was performed from 6 months prior to PBT for patients with intermediate- or high-risk disease. CAB was continued during PBT and then terminated at the end of PBT for intermediate-risk patients. Patients at high risk continued CAB for 3 years. No combination therapy was used for low-risk patients. All the patients were followed up for >2 years after PBT, and all but one were PSA failure-free. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v.4.0 was used to evaluate late adverse events. One patient developed grade 3 non-infectious cystitis and hematuria. Grade 2 urinary frequency was observed in 1 patient, and grade 2 rectal bleeding occurred in 4 patients. Of the 4 patients with grade 2 rectal bleeding, 2 received anticoagulant therapy, but none had diabetes mellitus or another high-risk comorbidity. The median time to occurrence of an adverse event of grade ≥2 was 14 months (range, 3–41 months). Therefore, the present retrospective study revealed that PBT at 78 GyE/39 Fr was well-tolerated and achieved good tumor control in patients with prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hirokazu Makishima
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Hitoshi Ishikawa
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Keiichi Tanaka
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Yutaro Mori
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Masashi Mizumoto
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Kayoko Ohnishi
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Teruhito Aihara
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Nobuyoshi Fukumitsu
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Toshiyuki Okumura
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| | - Hideyuki Sakurai
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Proton Medical Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8576, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Macroscopic Hematuria After Conventional or Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy: Results From a Prospective Phase 3 Study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2016; 96:304-312. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.05.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2016] [Revised: 04/21/2016] [Accepted: 05/18/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
8
|
Treatment of Urethral Strictures from Irradiation and Other Nonsurgical Forms of Pelvic Cancer Treatment. Adv Urol 2015; 2015:476390. [PMID: 26494994 PMCID: PMC4606407 DOI: 10.1155/2015/476390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2015] [Accepted: 09/13/2015] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Radiation therapy (RT), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), brachytherapy (BT), photon beam therapy (PBT), high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and cryotherapy are noninvasive treatment options for pelvic malignancies and prostate cancer. Though effective in treating cancer, urethral stricture disease is an underrecognized and poorly reported sequela of these treatment modalities. Studies estimate the incidence of stricture from BT to be 1.8%, EBRT 1.7%, combined EBRT and BT 5.2%, and cryotherapy 2.5%. Radiation effects on the genitourinary system can manifest early or months to years after treatment with the onus being on the clinician to investigate and rule-out stricture disease as an underlying etiology for lower urinary tract symptoms. Obliterative endarteritis resulting in ischemia and fibrosis of the irradiated tissue complicates treatment strategies, which include urethral dilation, direct-vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU), urethral stents, and urethroplasty. Failure rates for dilation and DVIU are exceedingly high with several studies indicating that urethroplasty is the most definitive and durable treatment modality for patients with radiation-induced stricture disease. However, a detailed discussion should be offered regarding development or worsening of incontinence after treatment with urethroplasty. Further studies are required to assess the nature and treatment of cryotherapy and HIFU-induced strictures.
Collapse
|