Literature DB >> 33775816

A Bicentric Propensity Score Matched Study Comparing Percutaneous Computed Tomography-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation to Magnetic Resonance-Guided Focused Ultrasound for the Treatment of Osteoid Osteoma.

Francesco Arrigoni1, Stavros Spiliopoulos2, Camilla de Cataldo3, Lazaros Reppas2, Pierpaolo Palumbo3, Argyro Mazioti2, Federico Bruno3, Luigi Zugaro4, Olympia Papakonstantinou2, Antonio Barile3, Alexis Kelekis2, Carlo Masciocchi3, Dimitrios Filippiadis2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the safety and efficacy of computed tomography-guided radiofrequency (RF) ablation and magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) in the treatment of osteoid osteoma with a long-term follow-up study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Database research was performed at 2 different centers with experience in musculoskeletal interventions. Both centers, one performing RF ablation and the other MRgFUS, identified 116 patients who underwent either RF ablation or MRgFUS procedures for the treatment of symptomatic osteoid osteoma and retrospectively evaluated data regarding pain scores using a visual analog scale (VAS). Complications were recorded according to the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe classification system. Propensity score matching for multiple variables was performed. Pain scores before and after therapy were compared.
RESULTS: Of 116 patients treated, 61 and 55 underwent RF ablation and MRgFUS, respectively. Before treatment, the mean reported pain in the 2 groups were 9.1 ± 0.88 (RF ablation) and 8.7 ± 0.73 (MRgFUS) VAS units. After treatment, a statistically significant (P < .00001) overall reduction in pain symptomatology was recorded. No statistically significant difference was observed between the mean values of pain after treatment in both groups (P = .256). Over a mean of >2 years of follow-up, 4 cases of relapse (RF ablation, 1; MRgFUS, 3) and 1 complication (RF ablation) were observed. The analysis from propensity score matching that identified a matched cohort of 48 patients showed similar results.
CONCLUSIONS: The 2 techniques for the treatment of osteoid osteoma resulted in profound and similar pain relief. The presence of thick cortical bone over the nidus can reduce the effectiveness of MRgFUS.
Copyright © 2021 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33775816     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2021.03.528

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol        ISSN: 1051-0443            Impact factor:   3.464


  5 in total

Review 1.  Radiofrequency ablation is as safe and effective as surgical excision for spinal osteoid osteoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alessandro Sangiorgio; Lorenzo Massimo Oldrini; Christian Candrian; Costantino Errani; Giuseppe Filardo
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-10-10       Impact factor: 2.721

2.  Role of percutaneous CT-guided radiofrequency ablation in treatment of intra-articular, in close contact with cartilage and extra-articular osteoid osteomas: comparative analysis and new classification system.

Authors:  Maria Silvia Spinelli; Mostafa Farouk Balbaa; Mauro Battista Gallazzi; Mohamed Emad-Eldin Eid; Hesham Taha Kotb; Mohamed El Shafei; Anna Maria Ierardi; Primo Andrea Daolio; Antonio Barile; Gianpaolo Carrafiello
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2022-09-04       Impact factor: 6.313

Review 3.  Needleless Ablation of Osteoid Osteoma and Osteoblastoma: The Emergent Role of MRgFUS.

Authors:  Flavia Cobianchi Bellisari; Pierpaolo Palumbo; Carlo Masciocchi; Carmine Zoccali; Antonio Barile; Francesco Arrigoni
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 4.241

4.  The surgical management of osteoid osteoma: A systematic review.

Authors:  Man Shu; Jin Ke
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-22       Impact factor: 5.738

5.  Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) guidance is helpful in reducing dose exposure to pediatric patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteoma.

Authors:  Francesco Fiore; Francesco Somma; Roberto D'Angelo; Luca Tarotto; Vincenzo Stoia
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2021-12-27       Impact factor: 3.469

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.