Bone Mass Changes Following Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation, Osteoplasty, Reinforcement, and Internal Fixation of Periacetabular Osteolytic Metastases.
ablation
bone mass
cementoplasty
internal fixation
osteolytic lesion
percutaneous
periacetabular
periacetabular metastases
radiofrequency ablation
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Jul 2023
11 Jul 2023
Historique:
received:
20
06
2023
revised:
08
07
2023
accepted:
09
07
2023
medline:
29
7
2023
pubmed:
29
7
2023
entrez:
29
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The success of orthopedic interventions for periacetabular osteolytic metastases depends on the progression or regression of cancer-induced bone loss. To characterize relative bone mass changes following percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, osteoplasty, cement reinforcement, and internal screw fixation (AORIF). Of 70 patients who underwent AORIF at a single institution, 21 patients (22 periacetabular sites; average follow-up of 18.5 ± 12.3 months) had high-resolution pelvic bone CT scans, with at least one scan within 3 months following their operation (baseline) and a comparative scan at least 6 months post-operatively. In total, 73 CT scans were measured for bone mass changes using Hounsfield Units (HU). A region of interest was defined for the periacetabular area in the coronal, axial, and sagittal reformation planes for all CT scans. For 6-month and 1-year scans, the coronal and sagittal HU were combined to create a weight-bearing HU (wbHU). Three-dimensional volumetric analysis was performed on the baseline and longest available CT scans. Cohort survival was compared to predicted PathFx 3.0 survival. HU increased from baseline post-operative (1.2 ± 1.1 months) to most recent follow-up (20.2 ± 12.1 months) on coronal (124.0 ± 112.3), axial (140.3 ± 153.0), and sagittal (151.9 ± 162.4), Percutaneous stabilization leads to improvements in bone mass and may allow for delays in extensive open reconstruction procedures.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The success of orthopedic interventions for periacetabular osteolytic metastases depends on the progression or regression of cancer-induced bone loss.
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
To characterize relative bone mass changes following percutaneous radiofrequency ablation, osteoplasty, cement reinforcement, and internal screw fixation (AORIF).
METHODS
METHODS
Of 70 patients who underwent AORIF at a single institution, 21 patients (22 periacetabular sites; average follow-up of 18.5 ± 12.3 months) had high-resolution pelvic bone CT scans, with at least one scan within 3 months following their operation (baseline) and a comparative scan at least 6 months post-operatively. In total, 73 CT scans were measured for bone mass changes using Hounsfield Units (HU). A region of interest was defined for the periacetabular area in the coronal, axial, and sagittal reformation planes for all CT scans. For 6-month and 1-year scans, the coronal and sagittal HU were combined to create a weight-bearing HU (wbHU). Three-dimensional volumetric analysis was performed on the baseline and longest available CT scans. Cohort survival was compared to predicted PathFx 3.0 survival.
RESULTS
RESULTS
HU increased from baseline post-operative (1.2 ± 1.1 months) to most recent follow-up (20.2 ± 12.1 months) on coronal (124.0 ± 112.3), axial (140.3 ± 153.0), and sagittal (151.9 ± 162.4),
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Percutaneous stabilization leads to improvements in bone mass and may allow for delays in extensive open reconstruction procedures.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37510728
pii: jcm12144613
doi: 10.3390/jcm12144613
pmc: PMC10380351
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
PLoS One. 2021 Sep 8;16(9):e0256076
pubmed: 34495961
Skeletal Radiol. 2008 Mar;37(3):189-94
pubmed: 18030464
Curr Oncol. 2012 Apr;19(2):59-60
pubmed: 22514490
N Engl J Med. 2012 Oct 25;367(17):1587-95
pubmed: 23094720
Front Oncol. 2020 May 13;10:742
pubmed: 32477951
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Mar 29;23(1):305
pubmed: 35351073
Curr Oncol. 2021 Jul 17;28(4):2731-2740
pubmed: 34287325
Bone Res. 2021 Sep 29;9(1):43
pubmed: 34588427
Front Oncol. 2022 Jan 03;11:793024
pubmed: 35047404
Clin Radiol. 2007 Apr;62(4):340-7
pubmed: 17331827
Radiology. 2023 May;307(3):e221401
pubmed: 36916888
Phys Med Biol. 2003 Jun 7;48(11):1591-603
pubmed: 12817940
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008 May 05;9:66
pubmed: 18457594
World Neurosurg. 2021 Jul;151:e418-e425
pubmed: 33892163
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2023 May;46(5):649-657
pubmed: 37052716
J Orthop Surg Res. 2016 Apr 28;11(1):54
pubmed: 27125184
J Pain Res. 2021 Sep 08;14:2807-2831
pubmed: 34526815
J Bone Oncol. 2022 Apr 06;34:100428
pubmed: 35479667
J Orthop Surg Res. 2023 Feb 10;18(1):93
pubmed: 36765379
Comput Math Methods Med. 2019 Jan 03;2019:4102410
pubmed: 30719069
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Aug;93(8):1104-10
pubmed: 21768637
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016 Jul;158(7):1421-7
pubmed: 27177734
Gut Liver. 2010 Sep;4 Suppl 1:S113-8
pubmed: 21103289
Radiol Imaging Cancer. 2021 May;3(3):e200137
pubmed: 33988476
Biomaterials. 1996 Nov;17(22):2117-26
pubmed: 8922597
Trials. 2021 Apr 29;22(1):313
pubmed: 33926539
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2022 Aug;32(8):1009-1013
pubmed: 35932124
Acta Orthop. 2020 Jun;91(3):341-346
pubmed: 32106736
World J Gastroenterol. 2020 May 7;26(17):2040-2048
pubmed: 32536773
Am J Clin Oncol. 2019 Mar;42(3):231-237
pubmed: 30811352
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Dec;21(13):4081-9
pubmed: 25223925
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020 Apr;478(4):808-818
pubmed: 32195761
PLoS One. 2019 Mar 1;14(3):e0213209
pubmed: 30822350
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2020 Oct;108(7):2765-2775
pubmed: 32170915
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2022 Feb;92:105565
pubmed: 34999389
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2014 Apr;32:76-88
pubmed: 24445003