ArticleSkeletal radiology2026
Prognostic factors for pain relief after CT-guided radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteoma: a 13-year retrospective study.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThe aim of this study is to evaluate the treatment response of patients with osteoid osteoma (OO) following radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and identify factors influencing the time to complete pain relief post-treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent RFA for OO between 2010 and 2023. Demographic, clinical data, and time between symptoms onset to diagnosis and RFA were recorded. CTs were reviewed for OO location (upper extremity, lower extremity, spine/pelvis), intra-articular versus extra-articular lesions, nidus size, degree of peripheral bone formation, and presence of vessel sign. Procedural related information included needle approach, RFA active tip length, and number of RFA cycles. Statistical analysis was made on factors and their correlation to complete pain relief.
resultsOut of 63 patients included in our study (mean age 19.3 ± 10.6), OO were located in the upper extremity (n = 7, 11%), lower extremity (n = 48, 76%), and pelvis/spine (n = 8, 13%). OO in the pelvis/spine achieved the quickest complete pain relief (14 days) compared to those in lower (25 days, 11 days longer) and upper extremity (54 days, 40 days longer) respectively (p = 0.04). Vessel sign had significant association with shorter time to complete pain relief (p = 0.03). Longer duration of symptoms until diagnosis or RFA, larger nidus, more bone formation, and extra-articular OO responded slower to RFA, though statistical significance was not reached.
conclusionsAnatomical location and certain imaging characteristics of OO may have association with time to complete pain relief following RFA. The findings can potentially help optimizing patient counseling with more realistic expectations and symptom management strategies prior to and following RFA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41591486What 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.