DOES THE HISTOLOGICAL PRESENCE OF A NIDUS CORRELATE WITH IMPROVED OUTCOMES IN OSTEOID OSTEOMA TREATED WITH PERCUTANEOUS RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION (RFA)?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of osteoid osteoma (OO) between the group of patients with the presence of nidus on biopsy samples from radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with those without nidus. Secondly, we aimed to examine other factors that may affect the outcomes of OO reflecting our experience as a tertiary orthopaedic oncology centre. We retrospectively reviewed 88 consecutive patients diagnosed with OO treated with RFA between November 2005 and March 2015, consisting of 63 males (72%) and 25 females (28%). Sixty-six patients (75%) had nidus present in their biopsy samples. Patients’ mean age was 17.6 years (4-53). Median duration of follow-up was 12.5 months (6-20.8). Lesions were located in the appendicular skeleton in seventy-nine patients (90%) while nine patients (10%) had an OO in the axial skeleton. Outcomes assessed were based on patients’ pain alleviation (partial, complete, or no pain improvement) and the need for further interventions. Pain improvement in the patient group with nidus in histology sample was significantly better than the group without nidus (OR 7.4, CI 1.35-41.4, p=0.021). The patient group with nidus on biopsy demonstrated less likelihood of having a repeat procedure compared to the group without nidus (OR 0.092, CI 0.016-0.542, p=0.008). Our study showed significantly better outcomes in pain improvement in appendicular lesions compared to the axially located lesions (p = 0.005). Patients with spinal lesions tend to have relatively poor pain relief than those with appendicular or pelvic lesions (p=0.007). Patients with nidus on histology had better pain alleviation compared to patients without nidus. The histological presence of nidus significantly reduces the chance of repeat interventions. The pain alleviation of OO following RFA is better in patients with appendicular lesions than spinal or axially located lesions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".