Imaging-guided radiofrequency ablation of osteoid osteoma in typical and atypical sites: Long term follow up.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and safety of imaging-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of Osteoid Osteoma (OO) in both typical and atypical sites. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between January 2014 and March 2019, 102 consecutive percutaneous RFA were performed and retrospectively reviewed. The procedures were performed using a RFA bipolar ablation system (Covidien, exposed tip of 0.7-1cm), under Computed Tomography (CT) guidance or using a navigation system (Masmec) under CT and Cone Beam CT (CBCT) guidance. Patients were followed up over 24 months. Clinical success and recurrences were considered on the base of established criteria. In patients with clinical failure and/or imaging evidence of relapse, retreatment was considered. RESULTS: Administered power per-procedure was ≤8 W (mean temperature, 90°C). The pre-procedure average value of visual analog scale (VAS) was 8.33+/-0.91. Primary and secondary success rate 96.08% (98/102) and100% (102/102), respectively. No major complication was described. Technical success was proved in every patient by CT scan acquisition after needle positioning. Relapse and tumour location were significantly correlated (p-value = 0.0165). The mean dose-length product was 751.55 mGycm2. Advanced bone healing was noted in 68 lesions after 1y-follow up and in 86 lesions after 2y-follow up. CONCLUSION: Imaging-guided percutaneous RFA is a highly effective technique for OO, both in typical and atypical sites. CT or CBCT guidance, navigation systems and operator experience grant the technical success, which is the most crucial parameter affecting outcome.

Characterizing Breakthrough Cancer Pain Using Ecological Momentary Assessment with a Smartphone App: Feasibility and Clinical Findings.

BACKGROUND: mobile applications (apps) facilitate cancer pain ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and provide more reliable data than retrospective monitoring. The aims of this study are (a) to describe the status of persons with cancer pain when assessed ecologically, (b) to analyze the utility of clinical alarms integrated into the app, and (c) to test the feasibility of implementing an app for daily oncological pain monitoring. METHODS: in this feasibility study, 21 patients (mean age = 56.95 years, SD = 10.53, 81.0% men) responded to an app-based evaluation of physical status (baseline and breakthrough cancer pain (BTcP)) and mental health variables (fatigue, mood, and coping) daily during 30 days. RESULTS: cancer pain characterization with the app was similar to data from the literature using retrospective assessments in terms of BTcP duration and perceived medication effectiveness. However, BTcP was less frequent when evaluated ecologically. Pain, fatigue, and mood were comparable in the morning and evening. Passive coping strategies were the most employed daily. Clinical alarms appear to be useful to detect and address adverse events. App implementation was feasible and acceptable. CONCLUSION: apps reduce recall bias and facilitate a rapid response to adverse events in oncological care. Future efforts should be addressed to integrate EMA and ecological momentary interventions to facilitate pain self-management via apps.

Symptom Burden in Patients Treated With Palliative Radiotherapy Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Oncological care has faced several challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, e.g. treatment delay and worsening symptoms. Patient-reported anxiety, depression and sleep quality might have changed due to these special circumstances. Therefore, we analyzed the symptom burden of patients treated with palliative radiotherapy at our center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was performed of 50 consecutive patients and the results were compared to those obtained in a previous pre-COVID study. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale was employed to assess the preradiotherapy symptoms. RESULTS: The highest mean scores were reported for pain in activity (3.2) and dry mouth (3.1). Regarding anxiety, sadness/depression and sleep, the corresponding scores were 1.5, 1.2 and 2.7, respectively. Compared to the previous study, no significant increases were found. Most items had numerically lower mean values, e.g. anxiety (1.5 vs. 2.7). Both study populations had comparable median age (70.5 vs. 70 years), gender distribution and proportion of patients with bone metastases. However, there were two significant imbalances, namely a lower proportion of patients with prostate cancer (12 vs. 30%, p=0.02) and breast cancer (0 vs. 12%, p=0.02). CONCLUSION: In patients who showed up for radiation treatment planning, the suspected increase in anxiety, sadness/depression and sleep disturbance was not demonstrable. It is not known whether or not patients with substantial worries chose to decline referral to palliative radiotherapy. Therefore, comprehensive large-scale studies of patterns of care are needed to fully understand the impact of COVID-19-related measures.