BackgroundThe percutaneous thermal ablation techniques (pTA) are radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, and microwave ablation, suitable for the treatment of bone oligometastases. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a noninvasive ablation technique.ObjectivesTo compare the effectiveness and safety of MRgFUS and pTA for treating bone oligometastases and their complications.MethodsStudies were selected with a PICO/PRISMA protocol: pTA or MRgFUS in patients with bone oligometastases; non-exclusive curative treatment. Exclusion criteria were: primary bone tumor; concurrent radiation therapy; palliative therapy; and absence of imaging at follow-up. PubMed, BioMed Central, and Scopus were searched. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed articles quality. For each treatment (pTA and MRgFUS), we conducted two separate random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effectiveness and safety. The effectiveness was assessed by combining the proportions of treated lesions achieving local tumor control (LTC); the safety by combining the complications rates of treated patients. Meta-regression analyses were performed to identify any outcome predictor.ResultsA total of 24 articles were included. Pooled LTC rate for MRgFUS was 84% (N = 7, 95% CI 66-97%, I2 = 74.7%) compared to 65% of pTA (N = 17, 95% CI 51-78%, I2 = 89.3%). Pooled complications rate was similar, respectively, 13% (95% CI 1-32%, I2 = 81.0%) for MRgFUS and 12% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 39.9%) for pTA, but major complications were recorded with pTA only.The meta-regression analyses, including technique type, study design, tumor, and follow-up, found no significant predictors.ResultsA total of 24 articles were included. Pooled LTC rate for MRgFUS was 84% (N = 7, 95% CI 66-97%, I2 = 74.7%) compared to 65% of pTA (N = 17, 95% CI 51-78%, I2 = 89.3%). Pooled complications rate was similar, respectively, 13% (95% CI 1-32%, I2 = 81.0%) for MRgFUS and 12% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 39.9%) for pTA, but major complications were recorded with pTA only.The meta-regression analyses, including technique type, study design, tumor, and follow-up, found no significant predictors.DiscussionThe effectiveness and safety of the two techniques were found comparable, even though MRgFUS is a noninvasive treatment that did not cause any major complication. Limited data availability on MRgFUS and the lack of direct comparisons with pTA may affect these findings.ConclusionsMRgFUS can be a valid, safe, and noninvasive treatment for bone oligometastases. Direct comparison studies are needed to confirm its promising benefits.

Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound versus percutaneous thermal ablation in local control of bone oligometastases. A systematic review and meta-analysis / Leporace, M.; Lancellotta, V.; Baccolini, V.; Calabria, F.; Castrovillari, F.; Filippiadis, D. K.; Tagliaferri, L.; Iezzi, R.. - In: LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA. - ISSN 1826-6983. - 129:2(2024), pp. 291-306. [10.1007/s11547-024-01780-4]

Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound versus percutaneous thermal ablation in local control of bone oligometastases. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Baccolini V.;
2024

Abstract

BackgroundThe percutaneous thermal ablation techniques (pTA) are radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, and microwave ablation, suitable for the treatment of bone oligometastases. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is a noninvasive ablation technique.ObjectivesTo compare the effectiveness and safety of MRgFUS and pTA for treating bone oligometastases and their complications.MethodsStudies were selected with a PICO/PRISMA protocol: pTA or MRgFUS in patients with bone oligometastases; non-exclusive curative treatment. Exclusion criteria were: primary bone tumor; concurrent radiation therapy; palliative therapy; and absence of imaging at follow-up. PubMed, BioMed Central, and Scopus were searched. The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed articles quality. For each treatment (pTA and MRgFUS), we conducted two separate random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the pooled effectiveness and safety. The effectiveness was assessed by combining the proportions of treated lesions achieving local tumor control (LTC); the safety by combining the complications rates of treated patients. Meta-regression analyses were performed to identify any outcome predictor.ResultsA total of 24 articles were included. Pooled LTC rate for MRgFUS was 84% (N = 7, 95% CI 66-97%, I2 = 74.7%) compared to 65% of pTA (N = 17, 95% CI 51-78%, I2 = 89.3%). Pooled complications rate was similar, respectively, 13% (95% CI 1-32%, I2 = 81.0%) for MRgFUS and 12% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 39.9%) for pTA, but major complications were recorded with pTA only.The meta-regression analyses, including technique type, study design, tumor, and follow-up, found no significant predictors.ResultsA total of 24 articles were included. Pooled LTC rate for MRgFUS was 84% (N = 7, 95% CI 66-97%, I2 = 74.7%) compared to 65% of pTA (N = 17, 95% CI 51-78%, I2 = 89.3%). Pooled complications rate was similar, respectively, 13% (95% CI 1-32%, I2 = 81.0%) for MRgFUS and 12% (95% CI 8-18%, I2 = 39.9%) for pTA, but major complications were recorded with pTA only.The meta-regression analyses, including technique type, study design, tumor, and follow-up, found no significant predictors.DiscussionThe effectiveness and safety of the two techniques were found comparable, even though MRgFUS is a noninvasive treatment that did not cause any major complication. Limited data availability on MRgFUS and the lack of direct comparisons with pTA may affect these findings.ConclusionsMRgFUS can be a valid, safe, and noninvasive treatment for bone oligometastases. Direct comparison studies are needed to confirm its promising benefits.
2024
bone metastases; local tumor control; magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound; oligometastatic; thermal ablation
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01g Articolo di rassegna (Review)
Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound versus percutaneous thermal ablation in local control of bone oligometastases. A systematic review and meta-analysis / Leporace, M.; Lancellotta, V.; Baccolini, V.; Calabria, F.; Castrovillari, F.; Filippiadis, D. K.; Tagliaferri, L.; Iezzi, R.. - In: LA RADIOLOGIA MEDICA. - ISSN 1826-6983. - 129:2(2024), pp. 291-306. [10.1007/s11547-024-01780-4]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Leporace_Magnetic-resonance-guided_2024.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 1.67 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.67 MB Adobe PDF   Contatta l'autore

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1702264
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact