A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

CT image guided thermal ablation techniques for palliation of painful bone metastases. | LitMetric

Background: Many different treatment methods have been used for pain palliation in patients with bone metastases. The ideal treatment has to be fast, safe, effective and tolerable for the patient.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of computed tomography (CT)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA) as a minimal invasive method of pain palliation.

Materials And Methods: A total of forty-five patients with painful bone metastases were included in our study (median age 65.43; range, 36-90 years). Thirty patients were treated with RFA and fifteen with MWA, all under CT guidance. Lesion diameter was between 2 and 9 cm (mean ± SD: 3.9±2.6 cm). Pain was assessed in all patients with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). All procedures were performed under conscious sedation. RFAs were performed with a RITA Model 1500® electrosurgical generator with a seven or a nine-array multitined electrode depending on the lesion's size. MWAs were done with AMICA-GEM microwave generator 2,450 MHz connected to a 14- or 16-gauge coaxial antenna. Technically successful ablation was considered to be when lesions were treated according to protocol and completely covered. After each session a dual-phase spiral CT examination with intravenous contrast medium was performed in order to evaluate immediate response. Patients were hospitalised and observed for 24-hour monitoring. Post-ablation assessment with BPI score and report of the use of analgesics was performed with telephone interview one, four and eight weeks after the ablation.

Results: In both groups there was a significant and similar decrease in the mean past day BPI score for worst pain, for average pain and for pain interference during daily life in comparison to preprocedural symptoms (P<0.001, paired t-test), one, 4 and 8 weeks after treatment. There was also a marked decrease (3 out of 45 patients, 4 and 8 weeks after treatment) in the use of analgesics. Mean ablation time for MWA was 4.5 minutes, shorter than RFA's mean ablation time that was 9.5 minutes but with the same clinical result.

Conclusions: RFA and MWA appear to be similarly effective for treatment of painful bone metastases. The main difference is that MWA achieves the same clinical result faster but in a more expensive way.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2224-5820.2014.04.02DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bone metastases
12
painful bone
8
bpi score
8
pain
7
patients
5
image guided
4
guided thermal
4
ablation
4
thermal ablation
4
ablation techniques
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!