7 ms·

By the way, your family member is probably aware of this but there is another ultrasound treatment option for prostate cancer that is completely non-invasive. I

By the way, your family member is probably aware of this but there is another ultrasound treatment option for prostate cancer that is completely non-invasive. It is called hifu. https://www.hifu-prostate.com/ https://www.hifu-prostate.com/ Hifu sends ultrasound from a curved emitter from outside the body in such a manner that the ultrasound ray will be focused on the treatment area. Thus, while you have ultrasound going through your body, only in the treatment area does it become high intensity enough to actually destroy tissue. This way they can burn off cancerous parts without damaging other parts of the prostate and the rest of the sensitive parts around there. I am not sure why the new atlas did not mention HIFU, it also uses MRI. HIFU is already cleared by the FDA, and it will become approved by medicare very soon (this coming January, I believe), so it will be paid by medicare and probably most insurance plans (as they tend to follow medicare).

mooreed 7y ago
@hristov I am incredibly moved by your wonderfully thoughtful reply; we are just getting up to speed so had not heard about this at all. From the bottom of my heart, thanks for sending this. Merry Christmas!
chollida1 7y ago
Can confirm and sing the praises of HiFu. Went to China so my spouse could have a procedure done in 2014. HiFu took 1-2 hours and my wife walked away from the procedure. She was hiking the next day. Tumor was shrinking almost immediately. The alternatives we had were surgery that would have removed part of her abs or weekly treatments of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamoxifen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamoxifen Neither of which was great. Now we had to pay for the HiFu but it was soooo worth it. I think it was about $25,000 USD so very reasonable and affordable for us.
- dorfsmay 7y ago
  For which cancers does this procedure work (assuming your wife didn't have prostate cancer)? I understand 25 k USD feels reasonable if it saves your life without surgery and it's complications, but it steep for "just ultrasound". Do you know why it was that expensive?
  - killjoywashere 7y ago
    MRI is probably the major technical cost. It's fairly high touch and the magnets wear out, so the capital cost of each test is fairly real. That and the professional component. Interventional radiologists are very much in the consultant/handyman/engineer business of "Treatment: $1; knowing where to put it: $9999"
    - comfrey11 7y ago
      In Japan an you can get an MRI for $160 US I hear
      - killjoywashere 7y ago
        Do you get the radiologist's read for $160? Do they put an ablative ultrasound probe in you and hold it for an hour for $160?
        comfrey11 7y ago
        Honestly I’m not sure with the 160 covers. It’s just another one of those things in our medical system that is priced a bit too high to make sense for a good number of folks. I would like to see healthcare be more accessible.
        Johnny555 7y ago
        What's the purpose of an ablative ultrasound probe in an MRI? An MRI uses high intensity magnetic fields, not ultrasound.
      - dogma1138 7y ago
        Medical treatment in Japan is mostly paid for by the government with the individual co-pay being 30-0% depending on the procedure. The cost to the patient =! the actual cost of the procedure. I would pay £0 for spending the night in the hospital even tho the cost of the trauma bed alone is £3200 per night according to NHS England.
- hnick 7y ago
  I assume the sound waves overlap and increase in amplitude, destroying the tumor cells. But I'm wondering why a shrinking tumor is enough - usually we cut the whole thing out so that it doesn't metastasise or regrow from small leftover parts. If the beam kills most of it, is that enough? Does it trigger a mass die-off or stimulate our immune system to do the rest of the job? Just wondering what the explanation here is.
HorizonXP 7y ago
Definitely agree that you should look into HIFU. HIFU is "competing" with transurethral focused ultrasound (TUS). HIFU works, but has its limitations. Given that it's transrectal, it will not be able to deposit ultrasound energy only into the prostate; the rectum gets hit too. Furthermore, there's no temperature feedback during the procedure; the doctor will send ultrasound energy to the target area and use ultrasound imaging to gauge the efficacy. It's a decent alternative, but it will never be as good as TUS at targeting just due to their inherent differences. But HIFU is available today, while TUS is not, and HIFU might be "good enough" for most people that it is more commercially successful.
- Konnstann 7y ago
  You can get temperature readings from a higher-frequency transducer. My old lab worked with HIFU and the transducer I used was a combination 1MHz and 20MHz conical transducer, where the inner high-frequency one was used for non-invasive temperature measurement. You get comparable results to implantable thermocouples.
- ChrisRR 7y ago
  The damage to the rectum isn't much as it's outside the focal point of the ultrasound. The main ablation happens at the point where the ultrasound is focused.

mooreed 7y ago

@hristov I am incredibly moved by your wonderfully thoughtful reply; we are just getting up to speed so had not heard about this at all. From the bottom of my heart, thanks for sending this. Merry Christmas!

chollida1 7y ago

Can confirm and sing the praises of HiFu. Went to China so my spouse could have a procedure done in 2014. HiFu took 1-2 hours and my wife walked away from the procedure. She was hiking the next day. Tumor was shrinking almost immediately. The alternatives we had were surgery that would have removed part of her abs or weekly treatments of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamoxifen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamoxifen Neither of which was great. Now we had to pay for the HiFu but it was soooo worth it. I think it was about $25,000 USD so very reasonable and affordable for us.

dorfsmay 7y ago
For which cancers does this procedure work (assuming your wife didn't have prostate cancer)? I understand 25 k USD feels reasonable if it saves your life without surgery and it's complications, but it steep for "just ultrasound". Do you know why it was that expensive?
- killjoywashere 7y ago
  MRI is probably the major technical cost. It's fairly high touch and the magnets wear out, so the capital cost of each test is fairly real. That and the professional component. Interventional radiologists are very much in the consultant/handyman/engineer business of "Treatment: $1; knowing where to put it: $9999"
  - comfrey11 7y ago
    In Japan an you can get an MRI for $160 US I hear
    - killjoywashere 7y ago
      Do you get the radiologist's read for $160? Do they put an ablative ultrasound probe in you and hold it for an hour for $160?
      - comfrey11 7y ago
        Honestly I’m not sure with the 160 covers. It’s just another one of those things in our medical system that is priced a bit too high to make sense for a good number of folks. I would like to see healthcare be more accessible.
      - Johnny555 7y ago
        What's the purpose of an ablative ultrasound probe in an MRI? An MRI uses high intensity magnetic fields, not ultrasound.
    - dogma1138 7y ago
      Medical treatment in Japan is mostly paid for by the government with the individual co-pay being 30-0% depending on the procedure. The cost to the patient =! the actual cost of the procedure. I would pay £0 for spending the night in the hospital even tho the cost of the trauma bed alone is £3200 per night according to NHS England.
hnick 7y ago
I assume the sound waves overlap and increase in amplitude, destroying the tumor cells. But I'm wondering why a shrinking tumor is enough - usually we cut the whole thing out so that it doesn't metastasise or regrow from small leftover parts. If the beam kills most of it, is that enough? Does it trigger a mass die-off or stimulate our immune system to do the rest of the job? Just wondering what the explanation here is.

HorizonXP 7y ago

Definitely agree that you should look into HIFU. HIFU is "competing" with transurethral focused ultrasound (TUS). HIFU works, but has its limitations. Given that it's transrectal, it will not be able to deposit ultrasound energy only into the prostate; the rectum gets hit too. Furthermore, there's no temperature feedback during the procedure; the doctor will send ultrasound energy to the target area and use ultrasound imaging to gauge the efficacy. It's a decent alternative, but it will never be as good as TUS at targeting just due to their inherent differences. But HIFU is available today, while TUS is not, and HIFU might be "good enough" for most people that it is more commercially successful.

Konnstann 7y ago
You can get temperature readings from a higher-frequency transducer. My old lab worked with HIFU and the transducer I used was a combination 1MHz and 20MHz conical transducer, where the inner high-frequency one was used for non-invasive temperature measurement. You get comparable results to implantable thermocouples.
ChrisRR 7y ago
The damage to the rectum isn't much as it's outside the focal point of the ultrasound. The main ablation happens at the point where the ultrasound is focused.