| Title |
Clinical long-term outcome, technical success, and cost analysis of radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of osteoblastomas and spinal osteoid osteomas in comparison to open surgical resection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Skeletal Radiology, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00256-015-2139-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marc-André Weber, Simon David Sprengel, Georg W. Omlor, Burkhard Lehner, Bernd Wiedenhöfer, Hans-Ulrich Kauczor, Christoph Rehnitz |
| Abstract |
To assess the clinical success and costs of computed tomography (CT)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of osteoblastoma (OB) and spinal osteoid osteoma (OO). Nineteen patients with OB and eight patients with spinal OO were treated with CT-guided RFA. The OBs were localized in the extremities (n = 10), the vertebral column (n = 2), and (juxta-)articular (n = 7). Dedicated procedural techniques included three-dimensional CT-guided access planning in all cases, overlapping RFA needle positions (median, two positions; range, 1-6 RF-electrode positions) within the OB nidus (multiple ablation technique, n = 15), and thermal protection in case of adjacent neural structure in four spinal OO. The data of eight operated OB and ten operated spinal OO patients were used for comparison. Long-term success was assessed by clinical examination and using a questionnaire sent to all operated and RFA-treated patients including visual analogue scales (VAS) regarding the effect of RFA on severity of pain and limitations of daily activities (0-10, with 0 = no pain/limitation up to 10 = maximum or most imaginable pain/limitation). All patients had a clear and persistent pain reduction until the end of follow-up. The mean VAS score for all spinal OO patients and all OB patients treated either with RFA or with surgical excision significantly decreased for severity of pain at night, severity of pain during the day, and both for limitations of daily and of sports activities. RFA is an efficient method for treating OB and spinal OO and should be regarded as the first-line therapy after interdisciplinary individual case discussion. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 17 | 23% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2021.
All research outputs
#7,486,175
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Skeletal Radiology
#437
of 1,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,947
of 265,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Skeletal Radiology
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,472 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.