Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29651762›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2018

Experience of neuroprotective air injection during radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of spinal osteoid osteoma.

Alessandro Vidoni, Melvin Grainger, Steven James

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Primary Benign Neoplasms of the Spine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alessandro VidoniDepartment of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol Road South, Northfield, Birmingham, B31 2AP, UK. alessandrovidoni@icloud.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1394-1400
Melvin GraingerSpinal Surgical Unit, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol Road South, Northfield, Birmingham, B31 2AP, UK.
Steven JamesDepartment of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol Road South, Northfield, Birmingham, B31 2AP, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the usefulness of epidural air injection during the RFA treatment of spinal osteoid osteoma.

methodsA retrospective review of 17 patients who underwent RFA for spinal osteoid osteoma between September 2006 and May 2017 was performed. All the procedures were performed by a single radiologist. We reviewed the perioperative CT studies to assess the distribution of air relative to the osteoid osteoma. The clinical outcome of each patient group was evaluated during routine follow-up.

resultsSeventeen patients were treated for spinal OO (male:female 13:4; mean age was 16, ranging from 4 to 42). The nidus size ranged from 5.8 to 17.2 mm (mean 11.2). In nine cases epidural air injection was performed. In three cases the neuroprotective air was deemed satisfactory with a clear layer of air between the osteoid osteoma and the dural sac being visualised. In six patients adherence between the cortical bone immediately adjacent to the osteoid osteoma and the dural sac in contact was observed. In 15 patients the procedure was successful in terms of pain relief. No neural damage or other complication was reported in either group.

conclusionRFA is a safe treatment for spinal osteoid osteoma. Neuroprotective air injection does not appear to be necessary when performing the treatment in the spine. KEY POINTS: • Seventeen patients with spinal OO were treated with RFA, nine with air injection and eight without. Clinically successful treatment was achieved in 15 patients, with 2 subsequently undergoing surgery • In 6/9 cases the injected air failed to achieve separation between the osteoid osteoma and the thecal sac because of inflammatory adhesion • No complications were observed, regardless of whether neuroprotective air was instilled. Neuroprotective air injection appears unnecessary when treating spinal OO.

Indexed as

AirAdolescentAdultBone NeoplasmsCatheter AblationChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInjections, EpiduralMaleNeuroprotective AgentsOsteoma, OsteoidRetrospective StudiesSpinal NeoplasmsSpineNeuroprotective AgentsInterventional radiologyNeuroprotectionOsteoid osteomaTomographyVertebral column

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.