Focal Therapy (FT) is an emerging treatment modality for prostate cancer (PCa). Due to its novelty, the research exploring how patients should be followed-up after treatment is limited. There is currently no established role for non-prostate-specific-antigen (PSA) biomarkers and PSMA PET. However, a combination of PSA testing, multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI), and systematic and targeted biopsies should routinely be used for surveillance after FT. PSA values that rise 1.0 ng/mL over the nadir after twelve months or rise 1.5 ng/mL over nadir after twenty-four to thirty-six months should raise suspicion for recurrence. The standard imaging technique is mpMRI, but it can often be difficult to interpret after FT, so using a scoring system such as prostate imaging after focal ablation (PI-FAB) or the transatlantic recommendations for prostate gland evaluation with magnetic resonance imaging after focal therapy (TARGET) allows for greater consistency between readers. This review seeks to summarize the current literature regarding surveillance after FT as it relates to biomarkers, imaging, biopsies, and consensus statements.

As the adoption of focal therapy (FT) for prostate cancer (PCa) grows, the demand for accurate post-treatment imaging to monitor outcomes and detect residual or recurrent cancer increases. Traditional diagnostic systems like the Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) are ill-suited for post-FT evaluations due to treatment-induced tissue changes. MRI-based scoring systems specific for evaluation after FT have been developed to address these challenges and improve post-FT imaging accuracy by distinguishing benign alterations from recurrence. The currently developed scoring systems are Transatlantic Recommendations for Prostate Gland Evaluation with MRI after Focal Therapy (TARGET) and Prostate Imaging after Focal Ablation (PI-FAB). In this review, we describe and compare these two systems. These scoring systems standardize imaging assessments, enhance follow-up care, and support clinical decision-making. While promising, TARGET and PI-FAB require further large-scale validation to confirm their utility. Nevertheless, they represent critical advances in optimizing PCa management, particularly for patients undergoing FT, by improving diagnostic accuracy and guiding treatment decisions.

Malignant priapism secondary to a genitourinary malignancy is a rare and late‐stage oncological finding. A 72‐year‐old man with a past medical history of muscle‐invasive bladder cancer treated with trimodal therapy presented with altered mental status, white discharge from his Foley catheter, and bilateral corporal rigidity. Initial pelvic magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated engorgement of the corporal bodies without obvious tumor invasion. The patient eventually underwent penile exploration and bilateral decompression, and a biopsy revealed high‐grade urothelial carcinoma invading the corporal tissues. Despite current guidelines for priapism, we present a three‐tiered approach to the management of malignant priapism.