Comparative Analysis of Percutaneous Excision and Radiofrequency Ablation for Osteoid Osteoma

BACKGROUND: This retrospective study aims to compare the efficacy of computed tomography-guided percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of osteoid osteoma. MATERIAL/METHODS: We evaluated 40 patients with osteoid osteoma who underwent either percutaneous excision or radiofrequency ablation between 2012 and 2015. The cohort consisted of 10 female and 30 male patients, with a mean age of 15.1 years (range: 4–27 years) and a mean follow-up time of 19.02 months (range: 11–39 months). Percutaneous excision was performed in 20 patients, while radiofrequency ablation was performed in the remaining 20 patients. RESULTS: The success rates of percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation were comparable, with unsuccessful outcomes observed in 10% and 5% of patients, respectively. The reasons for failure in the percutaneous excision group were attributed to a marking error and incomplete excision of the wide-based nidus. Complications were limited to pathological fracture (n=1) and deep infection (n=1) in the percutaneous excision group, while no complications were encountered in the radiofrequency ablation group. CONCLUSIONS: Both percutaneous excision and radiofrequency ablation demonstrate high success rates in treating osteoid osteoma. However, radiofrequency ablation offers the advantage of a quicker return to daily activities without the need for activity restrictions or splints. While being a more cost-effective option, percutaneous excision should be considered cautiously to minimize potential complications.