Advertisement

Treatment of Osteoid Osteomas Using a Navigational Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation System

  • Adam N. Wallace
  • Anderanik Tomasian
  • Randy O. Chang
  • Jack W. Jennings
Technical Note

Abstract

Background

Percutaneous CT-guided radiofrequency ablation is a safe and effective minimally invasive treatment for osteoid osteomas. This technical case series describes the use of a recently introduced ablation system with a probe that can be curved in multiple directions, embedded thermocouples for real-time monitoring of the ablation volume, and a bipolar design that obviates the need for a grounding pad.

Methods

Medical records of all patients who underwent radiofrequency ablation of an osteoid osteoma with the STAR Tumor Ablation System (DFINE; San Jose, CA) were reviewed. The location of each osteoid osteoma, nidus volume, and procedural details were recorded. Treatment efficacy and long-term complications were assessed at clinical follow-up.

Results

During the study period, 18 osteoid osteomas were radiofrequency ablated with the multidirectional bipolar system. Lesion locations included the femur (50 %; 9/18), tibia (22 %; 4/18), cervical spine (11 %; 2/18), calcaneus (5.5 %; 1/18), iliac bone (5.5 %; 1/18), and fibula (5.5 %; 1/18). The median nidus volume of these cases was 0.33 mL (range 0.12–2.0 mL). All tumors were accessed via a single osseous channel. Median cumulative ablation time was 5 min and 0 s (range 1 min and 32 s–8 min and 50 s). All patients with clinical follow-up reported complete symptom resolution. No complications occurred.

Conclusion

Safe and effective CT-guided radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteomas can be performed in a variety of locations using a multidirectional bipolar system.

Keywords

Osteoid osteoma Radiofrequency ablation CT 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of Interest

Author JWJ—is a speaker panelist for DFINE and consultant for Galil.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Lanza E, Thouvenin Y, Viala P, et al. Osteoid osteoma treated by percutaneous thermal ablation: when do we fail? A systematic review and guidelines for future reporting. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014;37:1530–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmed M, Solbiati L, Brace CL, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria—a 10-year update. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25(1691–1705):e1694.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hillen TJ, Anchala P, Friedman MV, Jennings JW. Treatment of metastatic posterior vertebral body osseous tumors by using a targeted bipolar radiofrequency ablation device: technical note. Radiology. 2014;273:261–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wallace AN, Robinson CG, Meyer J, et al. The metastatic spine disease multidisciplinary working group algorithms. Oncologist. 2015;20(10):1205–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wallace AN, Chang RO, Tomasian A, Jennings JW. Drill-assisted, fluoroscopy-guided vertebral body access for radiofrequency ablation: technical case series. Interv Neuroradiol. 2015;21(5):631–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wallace AN, Greenwood TJ, Jennings JW. Radiofrequency ablation and vertebral augmentation for palliation of painful spinal metastases. J Neurooncol. 2015;124:111–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wallace AN, Greenwood TJ, Jennings JW. Use of imaging in the management of metastatic spine disease with percutaneous ablation and vertebral augmentation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:434–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wallace AN, Tomasian A, Vaswani D, et al. Radiographic local control of spinal metastases with percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and vertebral augmentation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 (in press).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roqueplan F, Porcher R, Hamze B, et al. Long-term results of percutaneous resection and interstitial laser ablation of osteoid osteomas. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:209–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sampath SC, Rosenthal DI. Serially recurrent osteoid osteoma. Skeletal Radiol. 2015;44:875–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Earhart J, Wellman D, Donaldson J, Chesterton J, King E, Janicki JA. Radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of osteoid osteoma: results and complications. Pediatr Radiol. 2013;43:814–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Motamedi D, Learch TJ, Ishimitsu DN, et al. Thermal ablation of osteoid osteoma: overview and step-by-step guide. Radiographics. 2009;29:2127–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhou YF. High intensity focused ultrasound in clinical tumor ablation. World J Clin Oncol. 2011;2:8–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huffman SD, Huffman NP, Lewandowski RJ, Brown DB. Radiofrequency ablation complicated by skin burn. Semin Interv Radiol. 2011;28:179–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rathke H, Hamm B, Guttler F, et al. Comparison of four radiofrequency ablation systems at two target volumes in an ex vivo bovine liver model. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2014;20:251–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam N. Wallace
    • 1
  • Anderanik Tomasian
    • 1
  • Randy O. Chang
    • 2
  • Jack W. Jennings
    • 1
  1. 1.Mallinckrodt Institute of RadiologyWashington University School of MedicineSaint LouisUSA
  2. 2.Washington University School of MedicineSaint LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations