Comparison of Imaging Changes and Pain Responses in Patients with Intra- or Extraosseous Bone Metastases Treated Palliatively with Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity-Focused Ultrasound

Sharon L Giles, Matthew R D Brown, Ian Rivens, Martin Deppe, Merel Huisman, Young-Sun Kim, Paul Farquhar-Smith, John E Williams, Gail R Ter Haar, Nandita M deSouza

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study compared changes in imaging and in pain relief between patients with intraosseous, as opposed to extraosseous bone metastases. Both groups were treated palliatively with magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity-focused ultrasound (MRgHIFU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 21 patients were treated prospectively with MRgHIFU at 3 centers. Intraprocedural thermal changes measured using proton resonance frequency shift (PRFS) thermometry and gadolinium-enhanced T1-weighted (Gd-T1W) image appearances after treatment were compared for intra- and extraosseous metastases. Pain scores and use of analgesic therapy documented before and up to 90 days after treatment were used to classify responses and were compared between the intra- and extraosseous groups. Gd-T1W changes were compared between responders and nonresponders in each group.

RESULTS: Thermal dose volumes were significantly larger in the extraosseous group (P = 0.039). Tumor diameter did not change after treatment in either group. At day 30, Gd-T1W images showed focal nonenhancement in 7 of 9 patients with intraosseous tumors; in patients with extraosseous tumors, changes were heterogeneous. Cohort reductions in worst-pain scores were seen for both groups, but differences from baseline at days 14, 30, 60, and 90 were only significant for the intraosseous group (P = 0.027, P = 0.013, P = 0.012, and P = 0.027, respectively). By day 30, 67% of patients (6 of 9) with intraosseous tumors were classified as responders, and the rate was 33% (4 of 12) for patients with extraosseous tumors. In neither group was pain response indicated by nonenhancement on Gd-T1W.

CONCLUSIONS: Intraosseous tumors showed focal nonenhancement by day 30, and patients had better pain response to MRgHIFU than those with extraosseous tumors. In this small cohort, post-treatment imaging was not informative of treatment efficacy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1351-1360.e1
JournalJournal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
Volume30
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2019

Keywords

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Analgesics/therapeutic use
  • Bone Neoplasms/complications
  • Europe
  • Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy/adverse effects
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Musculoskeletal Pain/diagnosis
  • Pain Measurement
  • Palliative Care
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Prospective Studies
  • Seoul
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of Imaging Changes and Pain Responses in Patients with Intra- or Extraosseous Bone Metastases Treated Palliatively with Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity-Focused Ultrasound'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this