High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is a minimally invasive therapy applied for prostate cancer that capitalizes on the coagulation necrosis that occurs at temperatures greater than 60°C. Owing to a lack of long-term follow-up data the procedure is still considered experimental treatment. As primary therapy, HIFU is indicated in patients aged ≥70 years with clinical organ-confined disease, although it has also been used, with encouraging results, as first line salvage therapy after definitive treatment, and in locally advanced (T3-4) and non-metastatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer. Morbidity associated with this treatment method appears to be low and includes urinary retention (1-9%), urethral stricture (4-14%), incontinence (1-15%), erectile dysfunction (13-53%) and rectourethral fistulae (0-3%). The risk of complications increases with repeated treatments. A few studies have recently been published on HIFU as focal therapy. HIFU technology can be enhanced using means such as ultrasound microbubble contrast agents for assessment of therapy efficacy, magnetic resonance imaging to guide the enhancement of heat rate, and localized drug and gene delivery.

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) has recently been promoted as a non-invasive treatment option for prostate cancer. This systematic review sought to evaluate the evidence comparing it with standard treatment in patients with localised prostate cancer. The literature review included searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, annual meetings' abstracts and websites of evidence-based practice guideline producers. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials comparing HIFU with current management approaches, or were meta-analyses, systematic reviews or practice guidelines addressing HIFU. No randomised controlled trials or meta-analyses were identified. Seven systematic reviews and two practice guidelines were identified; neither contained randomised controlled trials. Adjusting the selection criteria to include case series found 34 clinical studies of HIFU. Twenty-nine evaluated HIFU as the primary treatment and five examined HIFU as salvage treatment for recurrence after radiotherapy. In most studies the outcomes used to determine efficacy were negative biopsy rates or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Among the 29 studies of HIFU as the primary treatment, negative biopsy rates ranged from 35 to 95% in 21 studies, a PSA nadir of ≤0.5 ng/ml ranged from 55 to 91% in 10 studies and mean PSA nadirs ranged from 0 to 1.9 ng/ml in 17 studies. Five studies reported 5-year disease-free survival rates ranging from 55 to 95%. Among five studies of HIFU as salvage treatment, negative biopsy rates ranged from 73 to 84% in four studies, a PSA nadir of ≤0.5 ng/ml ranged from 57 to 66% in three studies and mean PSA nadirs were 1.97 and 2.38 ng/ml in two studies, respectively. Current evidence on HIFU use in prostate cancer patients is of low quality, rendering it difficult to draw conclusions about its efficacy. Until results from case series are confirmed in prospective studies, the widespread use of HIFU is not supported.