A CT-free protocol to treat osteoid osteoma of the hip region in childhood and adolescence by percutaneous drilling and by hip arthroscopy

A comparative study assessing the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation versus surgical treatment for osteoid osteoma: retrospective analysis in a single institution

OBJECTIVE

We aim to evaluate the efficacy of CT-guided percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and surgical treatment in osteoid osteoma (OO) treated at the Medical University of Graz.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a single-institution study, we analysed data from January 2005 to January 2021 of patients with histological/radiological diagnosis of OO. CT and MRI scans were reviewed for typical findings. Means (with SD) and medians (with IQR) were reported for normally and non-normally distributed variables. Differences between groups were assessed using chi-squared tests and t-tests.

RESULTS

One hundred nineteen patients (mean age: 21.6 ± 10.9 years; 63.9% males) with confirmed OO were retrospectively evaluated. 73 and 43 patients underwent RFA and surgery, respectively. In three cases, RFA combined with surgery was performed. Pre-intervention, 103 patients (88.8%) had undergone CT, and 101 had an MRI (87.1%). The nidus was confirmed in 82.5% of cases with CTs (85/103) and 63.4% with MRIs (64/101). The majority of nidi were located cortically (n = 96; 82.8%), most frequently in the femur (38 patients, 33.3%) with a median size of 8.0 mm (IQR: 5.0-12.0 mm). Median symptom duration before treatment was 6.0 (IQR: 4.0-13.0) months. The complication rate was 12.1% (14/116; 15.1% RFA vs. 7.0% surgery; p = 0.196). In total, 11.2% of patients had persistent symptoms after one week with clinical success rates of RFA and surgery, 86.3% and 90.7% (p = 0.647), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared to surgical treatment, CT-guided percutaneous RFA is a safe, minimally invasive, reliable, and efficient treatment option for OO.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This article critically assesses the diagnosis and treatment of osteoid osteoma, emphasising accurate imaging, and detailing a non-invasive option for effective management.

KEY POINTS

• This study analyses 116 cases of OO at one institution, focusing on symptom persistence, recurrence in short-term follow-up, and complications in two study groups. • Surgery showed higher, though not statistically significant, success despite comparable symptom persistence; CT displayed typical OO features more than MRI, regardless of the intramedullary, cortical and subperiosteal location as well as the site of the affected bone. • CT-guided RFA is an effective therapeutic alternative for OO compared to surgical intervention. In case of atypical OO appearance, RFA is not the first-line treatment.

Intra- and juxta-articular osteoid osteoma in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Osteoid osteoma (OO) is a common benign tumor in children and adolescents, but intra-and juxta-articular OO is rare and difficult to diagnose. The purpose of this study is to investigate the distinctions between intra- and juxta-articular OO, trying to avoid delaying diagnosis and optimize treatment strategies.

METHODS

Thirty patients diagnosed with OO in the intra- and juxta joint at our institution who underwent surgical resection were included. Clinical and epidemiological factors, preoperative radiograph parameters, including computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and bone scan, were documented. The outcomes of the involved extremity were evaluated at the final follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean age at diagnosis, interval time, and follow-up time was 8.37±3.79 years old, 4.67±5.88 months, 3.57±2.18 years, respectively. Factors identified to be significantly associated with intra- and juxta-articular OO including pain with activity (P=0.004) and abnormal range of motion (P=0.00). The factor of abnormal range of motion (P=0.03) also influenced the existence of complications. Six children had a secondary operation to cure the recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

It is essential for clinicians and radiologists to be aware of the atypical clinical and radiographic features of intra- and juxta-articular OO, as the delayed diagnosis can lead to unnecessary pain and further complications after surgeries. The pain with activity and abnormal range of motion is helpful to identify the location of OO. The persistently abnormal range of motion also significantly leads to complications. The open surgeries to resect the nidus in juxta-articular OO were effective.

Hip arthroscopy has good clinical outcomes in the treatment of osteoid osteoma of the acetabulum

BACKGROUND

Osteoid osteoma (OO) of the acetabulum is a relatively rare disease. However, the the clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy for treatment of OO of the acetabulum are still uncertain.

METHODS

We evaluated consecutive patients who were diagnosed with OO of the acetabulum and who underwent hip arthroscopy at our hospital between January 2013 and March 2020. All patients underwent a preoperative physical examination. Preoperative supine anteroposterior hip radiography, cross-table lateral radiographs, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging were performed in all patients. The alpha angle and lateral center-edge angle were measured before surgery. Supine anteroposterior hip radiography and CT were performed in all patients postoperatively. Preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and PROs at final follow-up were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 6 patients (mean age, 18.7 years; age range, 6-31 years; 5 males and 1 females) were included in this study. The average follow-up period after surgery was 28.3 months (range, 6-90 months). Before surgery, the mean mHHS was 45.2 ± 10.5 (range, 33-56), the mean iHOT-12 was 33.3 ± 14.5 (range, 13-49), and mean VAS was 8.2 ± 1.0 (range, 7-9). At one month after surgery, mean mHHS was 78.7 ± 1.9 (range, 77-81), iHOT-12 was 71.0 ± 4.5 (range, 68-80), and mean VAS was 0. At the final post-operative follow-up, mean mHHS was 89.2 ± 2.1 (range, 86-91), iHOT-12 was 93.5 ± 5.0 (range, 88-98), and mean VAS was 0. All results, except VAS between one month after surgery and at final follow-up, demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < 0.05). One patient underwent revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Hip arthroscopy has good clinical outcomes in the treatment of OO of the acetabulum. Further study on the mechanism of secondary femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) caused by OO of the acetabulum is needed. More cases of arthroscopic excision and longer follow-up are also needed to better prove the clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy for OO of the acetabulum.