Comparative Analysis of Percutaneous Excision and Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoid Osteoma

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAtic, Ramazan
dc.contributor.authorAlemdar, Celil
dc.contributor.authorElci, Serhat
dc.contributor.authorDusak, Abdurrahim
dc.contributor.authorcacan, Mehmet Akif
dc.contributor.authorOzkul, Emin
dc.contributor.authorAytekin, Mahmut Nedim
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:15:08Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:15:08Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground: This retrospective study aims to compare the efficacy of computed tomography-guided percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of osteoid osteoma. Material/Methods: We evaluated 40 patients with osteoid osteoma who underwent either percutaneous excision or radiofrequency ablation between 2012 and 2015. The cohort consisted of 10 female and 30 male patients, with a mean age of 15.1 years (range: 4-27 years) and a mean follow-up time of 19.02 months (range: 11-39 months). Percutaneous excision was performed in 20 patients, while radiofrequency ablation was performed in the remaining 20 patients. Results: The success rates of percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation were comparable, with unsuccessful outcomes observed in 10% and 5% of patients, respectively. The reasons for failure in the percutaneous excision group were attributed to a marking error and incomplete excision of the wide-based nidus. Complications were limited to pathological fracture (n=1) and deep infection (n=1) in the percutaneous excision group, while no complications were encountered in the radiofrequency ablation group. Conclusions: Both percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation demonstrate high success rates in treating osteoid osteoma. However, radiofrequency ablation offers the advantage of a quicker return to daily activities without the need for activity restrictions or splints. While being a more cost-effective option, percutaneous excision should be considered cautiously to minimize potential complications.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.12659/MSM.940292
dc.identifier.issn1643-3750
dc.identifier.pmid37349982
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85162749328
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.940292
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/18350
dc.identifier.volume29en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001040497200001
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherInt Scientific Information, Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofMedical Science Monitor
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectRadiofrequency Ablationen_US
dc.subjectOsteomaen_US
dc.subjectOsteoiden_US
dc.subjectOrthopedic Proceduresen_US
dc.titleComparative Analysis of Percutaneous Excision and Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoid Osteomaen_US
dc.titleComparative Analysis of Percutaneous Excision and Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoid Osteoma
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu