ArticleEuropean radiology2025
To biopsy or not to biopsy: a retrospective review of presumed osteoid osteomas treated by radiofrequency ablation.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Osteoid osteoma: topographical distribution and imaging features in children and adults.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFirst, to determine the frequency and spectrum of osteoid osteoma (OO)-mimicking lesions among presumed OO referred for radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Second, to compare patient sex and age, lesion location, and rates of primary treatment failure for OO based on histopathology results. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective review was performed of all first-time combined CT-guided biopsy/RFA for presumed OO at a single academic center between January 1990 and August 2023. Lesions were characterized as "biopsy-confirmed OO", "OO-mimicking", or "non-diagnostic" based on pathology results. Treatment failure was defined as residual or recurrent symptoms requiring follow-up surgery or procedural intervention. Variables of interest were compared between pathology groups using Kruskal-Wallis, Fisher's exact, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests.
resultsOf 643 included patients (median 18 years old, IQR: 13-24 years, 458 male), there were 445 (69.1%) biopsy-confirmed OO, 184 (28.6%) non-diagnostic lesions, and 15 (2.3%) OO-mimicking lesions. OO-mimicking lesions included chondroblastoma (n = 4), chondroma (n = 3), enchondroma (n = 2), non-ossifying fibroma (n = 2), Brodie's abscess (n = 1), eosinophilic granuloma (n = 1), fibrous dysplasia (n = 1), and unspecified carcinoma (n = 1). OO-mimicking lesions did not show male predominance (46.7% male) like biopsy-proven OO (74.1% male) (p = 0.033). Treatment failure occurred in 24 (5.4%) biopsy-confirmed OO, 8 (4.4%) non-diagnostic lesions, and 2 (13.3%) OO-mimicking lesions without a significant difference by overall biopsy result (p = 0.24) or pairwise group comparison.
conclusionOO-mimicking pathology is infrequent, typically benign, but potentially malignant. OO-mimicking lesions do not exhibit male predominance. There was no significant difference in RFA treatment failure or lesion location among lesions with imaging appearances suggestive of OO. KEY POINTS: Question What is the frequency and spectrum of OO-mimicking lesions among presumed OO and what, if any, differences exist between these pathologies? Finding The study cohort included 69.1% OO, 28.6% lesions with non-diagnostic histopathology, and 2.3% OO-mimicking lesions. There was no difference in treatment failure or location among lesions. Clinical relevance Routine biopsy of presumed OO at the time of RFA identifies OO-mimicking lesions, which are rare and likely benign.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39325182What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.