Background/Objectives: Prostate cancer (PCa) outcomes vary significantly across risk groups. In early-stage localized PCa, the functional outcomes following radical prostatectomy (RP) can be severe, prompting increased interest in focal therapy, particularly High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU). This study is to summarize the current clinical trials of HIFU on PCa. Methods: We reviewed clinical trials from major databases, including PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE, to summarize the current research on HIFU in PCa treatment. Results: The literature highlights that HIFU may offer superior functional outcomes, particularly in continence recovery, compared to RP and radiation therapy. However, the oncological efficacy of HIFU remains inadequately supported by high-quality studies. Focal and hemigland ablations carry a risk of residual significant cancer, necessitating comprehensive patient counseling before treatment. For post-HIFU monitoring, we recommend 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with biopsy at 6 to 12 months to reassess the cancer status. Biochemical recurrence should be defined using the Phoenix criteria, and PSMA PET/CT can be considered for identifying recurrence in biopsy-negative patients. Conclusions: Whole-gland ablation is recommended as the general approach, as it provides a lower PSA nadir and avoids the higher positive biopsy rates observed after focal and hemigland ablation in both treated and untreated lobes. Future study designs should address heterogeneity, including variations in recurrence definitions and surveillance strategies, to provide more robust evidence for HIFU’s oncological outcomes.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate augmented reality-assisted single-incision laparoscopic adrenalectomy (AR-SILA) and compare with pure SILA. Materials and Methods: Between January 2009 and March 2012, a total of 19 patients had received SILA. Eight cases were AR-SILA and the others were pure SILA. Results: Eight AR-SILA procedures and 11 SILA were successfully completed. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, body mass index, and tumor size. Operative times were shorter in the AR-SILA group (102.5 ± 12.8 vs. 150.9 ± 46.3, P = 0.005). The mean blood loss in the AR-SILA group was slightly less than that in the SILA group (60.0 ± 25.6 vs. 109.1 ± 80.1, P = 0.129). There was neither postoperative mortality nor morbidity at the time of discharge and during follow-up. Conclusion: AR-SILA provides important intraoperative information for surgeons to recognize where the pathological lesions and vessels are located beyond the surgeon's direct vision. It made SILA safer and easier.