Safety and Feasibility of Steerable Radiofrequency Ablation in Combination with Cementoplasty for the Treatment of Large Extraspinal Bone Metastases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cementoplasty, individually and in concert, has been adopted as palliative interventional strategies to reduce pain caused by bone metastases and prevent skeletal related events. We aim to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a steerable RFA device with an articulating bipolar extensible electrode for the treatment of extraspinal bone metastases. Methods: All data were retrospectively reviewed. All the ablation procedures were performed using a steerable RFA device (STAR, Merit Medical Systems, Inc., South Jordan, UT, USA). The pain was assessed with a VAS score before treatment and at 1-week and 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. The Functional Mobility Scale (FMS) was recorded preoperatively and 1 month after the treatment through a four-point scale (4, bedridden; 3, use of wheelchair; 2, limited painful ambulation; 1, normal ambulation). Technical success was defined as successful intraoperative ablation and cementoplasty without major complications. Results: A statistically significant reduction of the median VAS score before treatment and 1 week after RFA and cementoplasty was observed (p < 0.001). A total of 6/7 patients who used a wheelchair reported normal ambulation 1 month after treatment. All patients with limited painful ambulation reported normal ambulation after the RFA and cementoplasty (p = 0.003). Technical success was achieved in all the combined procedures. Two cement leakages were reported. No local recurrences were observed after 1 year. Conclusions: The combined treatment of RFA with a steerable device and cementoplasty is a safe, feasible, and promising clinical option for the management of painful bone metastases, challenging for morphology and location, resulting in an improvement of the quality of life of patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".