STUDY DESIGN: A restrospective review of 81 cases of osteoid osteoma of the mobile spine submitted to surgical treatment. OBJECTIVE: Analyze pro and contras of different techniques (conventional and minimally invasive) for the treatment of osteoid osteoma. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Intralesional excision has been considered the standard treatment for spinal osteoid osteoma. The high success rate of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of a variety of spinal disorders lead us to believe this technique can also be applicable for the treatment of osteoid osteoma of the spine. METHODS: Eighty-one patients affected by osteoid osteoma were consecutively treated by the same team with intralesional excision using conventional or minimally invasive approach by video-assisted endoscopy, microscope, or percutaneous radiofrequency coagulation. The clinical features, the radiologic findings, and the outcome were reviewed. Pain and neurologic symptoms, were scored before surgery, after surgery and at the follow-up. Complications and local recurrences were also recorded. RESULTS: Immediate relief of pain was observed after surgery in all patients. One patient showed mild neurologic impairment before treatment but became free of neurologic symptoms postoperative. Five local recurrences were found in four patients, always associated with pain. Three of these patients underwent surgery for a second time and one patient for a third time. There were two complications because surgery in two patients. One patient developed a pneumothorax, the other a hematoma. No related cases of kyphosis or scoliosis surgery were observed. CONCLUSION: Conventional excision therapy is a effective and reliable treatment for osteoid osteoma associated to low morbidity and low local recurrence rate. Minimally invasive surgery is emerging as an alternative method, reducing soft tissue trauma and the collateral damage caused by traditional surgical approach, allow patients a more rapid and complete return to normal function.
STUDY DESIGN: A restrospective review of 81 cases of osteoid osteoma of the mobile spine submitted to surgical treatment. OBJECTIVE: Analyze pro and contras of different techniques (conventional and minimally invasive) for the treatment of osteoid osteoma. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Intralesional excision has been considered the standard treatment for spinal osteoid osteoma. The high success rate of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of a variety of spinal disorders lead us to believe this technique can also be applicable for the treatment of osteoid osteoma of the spine. METHODS: Eighty-one patients affected by osteoid osteoma were consecutively treated by the same team with intralesional excision using conventional or minimally invasive approach by video-assisted endoscopy, microscope, or percutaneous radiofrequency coagulation. The clinical features, the radiologic findings, and the outcome were reviewed. Pain and neurologic symptoms, were scored before surgery, after surgery and at the follow-up. Complications and local recurrences were also recorded. RESULTS: Immediate relief of pain was observed after surgery in all patients. One patient showed mild neurologic impairment before treatment but became free of neurologic symptoms postoperative. Five local recurrences were found in four patients, always associated with pain. Three of these patients underwent surgery for a second time and one patient for a third time. There were two complications because surgery in two patients. One patient developed a pneumothorax, the other a hematoma. No related cases of kyphosis or scoliosis surgery were observed. CONCLUSION: Conventional excision therapy is a effective and reliable treatment for osteoid osteoma associated to low morbidity and low local recurrence rate. Minimally invasive surgery is emerging as an alternative method, reducing soft tissue trauma and the collateral damage caused by traditional surgical approach, allow patients a more rapid and complete return to normal function.
Authors: L G Morassi; K Kokkinis; D S Evangelopoulos; O Karargyris; I Vlachou; K Kalokairinou; S G Pneumaticos Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Ben Wang; Song Bo Han; Liang Jiang; Hui Shu Yuan; Chen Liu; Bin Zhu; Zhong Jun Liu; Xiao Guang Liu Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2017-04-08 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Marc-André Weber; Simon David Sprengel; Georg W Omlor; Burkhard Lehner; Bernd Wiedenhöfer; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Christoph Rehnitz Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2015-04-25 Impact factor: 2.199