Ablative techniques have rapidly
evolved and have been
proven effective for treatment
of benign skeletal lesions and, more
recently, for palliation of painful metastatic
skeletal disease. Treatment of
primary bone lesions is largely restricted
to benign lesions, such as osteoid
osteomas, as a single-modality
treatment or as an adjunct to surgical
resection.[1-4] The use of ablation
techniques for treatment of metastatic
disease has developed because of the
often disabling pain cancer patients
experience. This pain can persist despite
use of conventional therapies,
including external beam radiation and
opioid analgesics.[5-8]
Skeletal Lesions
Benign Skeletal Lesions:
Osteoid Osteoma
Treatment of benign skeletal lesions
with percutaneous ablation
methods is an attractive alternative to
or replacement for surgical resection
because of the high effectiveness and
low morbidity associated with these
techniques.
Osteoid osteomas are relatively
common, accounting for approximately
10% of benign bone tumors.[9] Prior
to 1997 they were treated by
surgical excision. Despite the typical
small size of the lesion, the operative
resection could be extensive but often
incomplete.[3] With improved precise
localization using CT, the nidus of
the lesion can be effectively located
and the lesion completely treated with
percutaneous radiofrequency ablation
(RFA).[1,2,10-12]
Rosenthal has reported a 91% success
rate for RFA as the initial treatment
(107 of 117 procedures) and
60% for recurrent lesions (6 of 10
procedures).[4] Rosenthal also reported
no significant difference in the rate
of recurrence when osteoid osteoma
lesions were treated with either surgical
excision or percutaneous ablation.[
3] Because of the equal efficacy
of surgery compared with RFA and in
light of the relatively low morbidity
and lower costs associated with the
percutaneous method,[13] most centers
now consider RFA to be the standard
treatment for osteoid osteoma.
Malignant Skeletal Lesions:
Painful Metastatic Disease
Skeletal metastases are a common
problem for cancer patients. They can
have complications including pain,
fractures, and decreased mobility that
often reduce performance status, affect
a patient's quality of life, and
lead to depression and anxiety.[14,15]
External beam radiation therapy
(RT) is the current standard of care
for cancer patients who present with
localized bone pain. This treatment
results in a reduction in pain for the
majority of these patients; however,
20% to 30% do not experience pain
relief, and few options exist for these
patients.[16-21]
Pain relief from RT may be transient
for more than 50% of patients at
a median of 15 weeks after completion
of RT therapy.[22] Unfortunately,
patients who have recurrent pain
at a previously irradiated metastatic
site are often not eligible for further
RT secondary to limitations in normal
tissue tolerance. Additionally,
metastatic disease in this patient population
is frequently refractory to standard
chemotherapy or hormonal
therapy. Surgery, which is usually reserved
for impending fracture, is not
always an option when patients have
advanced disease and poor functional
status. Radiopharmaceuticals,
which have known benefit in patients
with diffuse painful bony metastases,
are not considered standard of care
for patients with isolated, painful lesions.
Analgesics remain the only alternative
treatment option for many patients
with painful metastatic disease.
But obtaining sufficient pain control
often involves side effects, such as
constipation, nausea, and sedation.
Percutaneous Radiofrequency
Ablation
A recent feasibility clinical trial
and a subsequent international multicenter
clinical trial of the use of percutaneous
RFA for treatment of
painful metastatic lesions involving
bone found that this procedure is safe
and provides significant relief of
pain.[5,7,8] It is important to note that
these patients had failed conventional
treatments, including RT and chemotherapy.
They reported durable significant
decreases in worst pain in a
24-hour period and a high level of
pain relief (Figure 1). A total of 59 of
62 patients (95%) experienced a decrease
in pain that was considered
clinically significant using a predefined
validated end point (≥ twopoint
drop in worst pain in a 24-hour
period).[23] Significant adverse
events following the procedure were
noted in four patients (6.5%).
Selection of patients for this treatment
requires that they have significant
pain (≥ 4/10 worst pain in a
24-hour period) and that the painful
disease is limited to a few osteolytic
metastases. The portions of metastatic
tumors that are within 1 cm of critical
structures-including bowel,
bladder, spinal cord, or motor
nerves-must be avoided to prevent
damage to these structures. For example,
a patient with metastatic melanoma
had a painful metastasis
involving the proximal tibia (Figure
2). Two separate deployments of the
RF electrode were performed, treating
both the osseous metastasis and
the metastasis overlying the tibia. Pain
in the treated area was markedly improved
over 3 to 4 weeks and completely
eliminated after 6 weeks.
Treatment response was durable over
the 24-week follow-up period.
Percutaneous Cryoablation
Cryoablation has a long history of
successful treatment of neoplasms in
several organs, including prostate, kidney,
liver, and the uterus. First-generation devices were limited to intraoperative
use because of their large diameter,
the use of liquid nitrogen for
tissue cooling, and the lack of wellinsulated
probes. Newly developed
percutaneous cryoprobes are based on
delivery of argon gas through a segmentally
insulated probe, with rapid
expansion of the gas resulting in rapid
cooling, reaching -100oC within a
few seconds. Active thawing of the
iceball is achieved by actively instilling
helium gas, instead of argon gas,
into the cryoprobes.
As part of an ongoing prospective
clinical trial, we have used cryoablation
to treat 14 patients with painful
metastatic disease involving bone.
This effort involves patients who have
one or two painful osteolytic lesions
that cause ≥ 4/10 pain in a 24-hour
period. Patients' response to the treatment
is assessed regularly over a
2-year period using the Brief Pain
Inventory-Short Form (BPI), a validated
visual analog scale for assessment
of patient pain.
A 72-year-old man with metastatic
renal cell carcinoma to the midshaft
of the femur had 6/10 worst pain
in a 24-hour period despite previous
external beam radiation and intramedullary
rod placement. He was treated
by percutaneous computed tomography
(CT)-guided placement of three
cryoprobes (Figure 3). The iceball that
was generated was monitored with
intermittent CT imaging to both treat
the target lesion and avoid the adjacent
femoral artery and vein and the
sciatic nerve. Pain from the metastatic
lesion was markedly reduced following
treatment and, most importantly,
the patient reported an improved quality
of life with resumption of an
active lifestyle.
Preliminary analysis of the patients
treated to date is encouraging. Prior
to cryoablation, the mean score for
worst pain in a 24-hour period was
6.7/10 with a range of 5/10 to 10/10.
At 4 weeks after cryoablation, the
mean score for worst pain in a 24-
hour period decreased to 3.8/10 (standard
deviation = 0.5, P = .0003).
During the follow-up, 86% of the
treated patients reported at least a
three-point drop in their worst pain,
with 50% reporting complete relief of
pain. All patients who were prescribed
narcotics prior to the procedure reported
a reduction in the use of narcotic
analgesic medications at some
time following cryoablation. No serious
complications have been observed.
Some lesions at risk for fracture
may also be treated with ablation followed
by cementoplasty the next day.
A 65-year-old man with lung cancer
presented with left hip pain on walking.
Upon CT examination an osteolytic
supra-acetabular metastasis
with preserved cortex at the level of
the hip joint (Figure 4A) was found.
Treatment considerations included resection
and stabilization of the acetabulum
because of fracture risk,
radiation therapy, and percutaneous
ablation followed by cementoplasty.
The patient elected for the percutaneous
approach and was treated with
cryoablation and cementoplasty on the
following day (Figures 4B and 4C).
He reports no pain in the treated region,
and no fracture or progression
has occurred at the treated site after
18 months.
Both cryoablation and RFA are effective
for palliation of pain due to
metastatic disease in patients who have
failed conventional therapies. The significant
advantages of percutaneous
cryoablation relative to RF ablation
for treatment of painful metastases
are as follows:
- The iceball, which defines the limits of the zone of ablation, can be readily identified with CT imaging.
- The simultaneous use of multiple cryoprobes allows generation of large zones of ablation (> 8-cm diameter).
- Simultaneous use of several cryoprobes eliminates possible residual disease that can result along the boundaries of overlapping sequential ablations.[24]
- The cryoablation procedure is compatible with the use of tissue displacement devices such as balloons that allow safe treatment of lesions adjacent to bowel.
- In contrast to RFA, cryoablation has mild or no significant pain associated with the procedure or in the immediate posttreatment period. One drawback of the use of cryoablation is that the procedure requires, on average, 2 to 3 hours. This is approximately 1 hour longer than the time needed for RF ablation.
Conclusion
Percutaneous RFA of osteoid osteomas
has replaced surgical excision
as the preferred method for treatment
of these benign lesions. Percutaneous
ablation is also an important treatment
method for managing pain due
to bony metastatic disease. These image-
guided treatments can be performed
precisely, allowing safe
treatment of complex metastatic tumors.
A single ablation treatment is
effective in most patients, is well tolerated,
and provides a long duration
of pain relief.
