Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Šalata 6-7, 10 000, Zagreb, Croatia.
School of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Šalata 2, 10 000, Zagreb, Croatia.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Mar 25;23(1):287. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05244-6.
Today, intra-articular and juxta-articular osteoid osteomas are treated with arthroscopy and radiofrequency thermal ablation. However, for the case of an elbow joint, arguments are made for the use of a minimally invasive technique to be the optimal choice. This study aims to analyse our experiences of arthroscopically treated elbow osteoid osteomas and to compare it with the published results of both techniques.
The retrospective study analyses the patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy ablation of an elbow osteoid osteoma at a single institution from January 2014 until March 2020. Clinical and diagnostic features, success and treatment failure rates, complications and tumour recurrence rates were all compared to 13 studies of intra-articular elbow osteoid osteoma arthroscopic ablation and 15 studies involving radiofrequency thermal ablation of intra-articular osteoid osteoma within different joints.
Four males and two females, with a mean age of 19.3 years, were encompassed. All the patients had immediate postoperative pain relief and improved range of motion. No tumour recurrences were observed during a median of 21.7 months. The literature review yielded 86.4% success rate, 68.2% successful biopsies, one minor complication and no recurrences following the arthroscopic ablation of an elbow osteoid osteoma; while radiofrequency thermal ablation of an intra-articular elbow osteoid osteoma yielded 96.3% success rate, 33.3% successful biopsies, no complications and 3.7% recurrence rate.
Our results are consistent with the published literature proving that arthroscopic ablation is an efficient method with low treatment failure rates and no recurrences in treating intra- and juxta-articular elbow osteoid osteomas. Advantages of arthroscopic ablation stem from the ability to visualise and safely deal with the lesion and the joint's reactive changes resulting in high biopsy rates, no recurrences and better postoperative elbow's range of motion. Still, the technique selection should be personalised considering the medical expertise of every institution.
如今,关节内和关节旁骨样骨瘤采用关节镜和射频热消融术治疗。然而,对于肘关节病例,有人认为微创技术是最佳选择。本研究旨在分析关节镜治疗肘关节骨样骨瘤的经验,并与两种技术的已发表结果进行比较。
这项回顾性研究分析了 2014 年 1 月至 2020 年 3 月在一家机构接受肘关节镜下骨样骨瘤消融术的患者。将临床和诊断特征、成功率和治疗失败率、并发症和肿瘤复发率与 13 项关节内肘关节骨样骨瘤关节镜消融术研究和 15 项涉及不同关节内射频热消融术的研究进行比较。
共纳入 4 名男性和 2 名女性,平均年龄为 19.3 岁。所有患者术后即刻疼痛缓解,活动范围改善。中位随访 21.7 个月未见肿瘤复发。文献回顾显示,关节镜下切除肘关节骨样骨瘤的成功率为 86.4%,活检成功率为 68.2%,有 1 例轻微并发症,无复发;而射频热消融关节内肘关节骨样骨瘤的成功率为 96.3%,活检成功率为 33.3%,无并发症,复发率为 3.7%。
我们的结果与文献报道一致,证明关节镜下消融术是一种有效的方法,治疗肘关节内和关节旁骨样骨瘤的治疗失败率低,无复发。关节镜下消融术的优势在于能够可视化和安全处理病变和关节的反应性改变,从而提高活检率、降低复发率和改善术后肘关节活动范围。然而,应根据每个机构的医疗专业知识来个性化选择技术。