Research behind these treatments
Dr. Scionti's treatment recommendations are guided by peer-reviewed research on ablative prostate cancer therapy. The studies below were published in medical journals by independent research teams; they were not conducted by Scionti Prostate Center. Each is summarized here in plain language, with a link to the source.
HIFI trial: HIFU compared with radical prostatectomy
European Urology, May 2025. This prospective study across 46 centers in France compared whole-gland or subtotal HIFU with radical prostatectomy, the surgical removal of the prostate. It followed 3,328 men with low- to intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated between 2015 and 2019: 1,967 treated with HIFU and 1,361 with surgery.
The main measure was salvage therapy-free survival, meaning how many men went 30 months without needing additional cancer treatment. On that measure, HIFU was not inferior to surgery. Men treated with HIFU were less likely to report worse urinary continence at 12 months, 29 percent compared with 44 percent, and their average drop in erectile function scores was smaller. About 10 percent of HIFU patients experienced urinary retention, and rates of serious complications were similar in both groups.
The authors point out two limitations. Patients were not randomly assigned to a treatment, and the men in the HIFU group were older on average, with a median age of 74.7 years compared with 65.1 years in the surgery group. The results should be read with those limits in mind, and longer follow-up is still needed.
Whether HIFU or another approach fits your situation depends on your imaging, biopsy results, prostate size and overall health. Dr. Scionti reviews those factors with every patient before recommending treatment.
