{
  "abstract": "Introduction Bone metastases are a common and debilitating complication of advanced malignancies, particularly those arising from breast, prostate, lung, kidney, and thyroid cancers. The skeletal system is the third most common site of metastatic disease, after the lungs and liver. The clinical consequences of bone metastases include severe pain, pathological fractures, spinal cord compression, hypercalcemia, and significant impairment in quality of life. Traditional treatments—such as systemic therapies, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), and surgery—are effective for many patients but have limitations, especially in cases of refractory pain or when local control is needed. In recent years, minimally invasive image-guided ablation techniques, notably cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), have emerged as valuable options for the local treatment of bone metastases.This review will discuss the pathophysiology of bone metastases, the principles and techniques of cryoablation and RFA, clinical outcomes, safety profiles, patient selection, and future perspectives, with a focus on recent literature. Pathophysiology of Bone Metastases: Bone metastases result from the dissemination of malignant cells from the primary tumor to the bone microenvironment. The process involves complex interactions between tumor cells, bone marrow stromal cells, osteoclasts, and osteoblasts. Metastatic lesions are classified as osteolytic, osteoblastic, or mixed, depending on whether bone resorption, bone formation, or both predominate. Osteolytic metastases are characterized by increased bone resorption mediated by osteoclast activation, while osteoblastic lesions involve excessive bone formation. The imbalance between bone destruction and formation leads to skeletal-related events (SREs), including pain, fractures, and neurological deficits. Traditional Management of Bone Metastases: The main goals of therapy for bone metastases are pain relief, prevention of SREs, maintenance of function, and improvement of quality of life. Conventional treatments include: - Systemic therapies: Chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, bisphosphonates, denosumab, and targeted agents. - Radiation therapy: EBRT is the standard of care for localized painful bone metastases, with response rates up to 70–80%. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) offers higher precision and ablative doses. - Surgery: Reserved for patients with impending or established pathological fractures, spinal cord compression, or instability. Despite these options, a significant proportion of patients experience inadequate pain relief, recurrent symptoms, or cannot tolerate certain interventions due to comorbidities or prior treatments. Image-guided ablation techniques have been developed to address these gaps. Image-guided ablation involves the percutaneous insertion of probes into the tumor under imaging guidance (CT, MRI, or ultrasound) to deliver thermal or freezing energy, causing irreversible cellular injury and tumor destruction. The two most widely used modalities for bone metastases are cryoablation and RFA. Cryoablation Cryoablation uses the Joule-Thomson effect to create extremely cold temperatures (as low as -40°C to -100°C) at the probe tip, inducing rapid freezing of the surrounding tissue. The process involves: - Ice crystal formation: Intracellular and extracellular ice formation disrupts cellular membranes and organelles. - Vascular injury: Freezing damages blood vessels, causing ischemia and further cell death. - Immunologic effects: Release of tumor antigens may stimulate an anti-tumor immune response. Typically, two or more freeze-thaw cycles are performed to maximize cell death. The ablation zone is visualized as an ‘ice ball’ on CT or MRI, allowing real-time monitoring of the ablation margin. Technique: Under conscious sedation or general anesthesia, one or more cryoprobes are inserted percutaneously into the target lesion under CT or MRI guidance. The number and configuration of probes depend on tumor size and location. Adjunctive measures, such as hydrodissection or thermoprotection, may be used to protect adjacent structures (e.g., nerves, bowel). Clinical Outcomes:Multiple studies have demonstrated the efficacy of cryoablation for pain relief and local tumor control in bone metastases Pain Relief: Cryoablation provides rapid and durable pain relief in 70–90% of patients, often within days. Several prospective trials and retrospective analyses have reported significant reductions in pain scores and opioid consumption, with effects lasting several months or longer. Local Control: Local tumor control rates range from 70% to 90%, depending on lesion size, location, and tumor histology. Cryoablation is particularly effective for small to moderate-sized lesions (<5 cm), but larger lesions may require multiple sessions or combination therapy. Quality of Life: Improvements in mobility, function, and overall quality of life have been reported in most studies. Safety Profile: Cryoablation is generally well-tolerated, with a low incidence of major complications. The most common adverse events include:transient post-procedural pain, bleeding or hematoma, nerve injury or neuropathy (rare, but a risk for lesions near neural structures), fracture (especially in weight-bearing bones or large ablation zones). Careful patient selection and procedural planning are essential to minimize risks. Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) RFA uses alternating electrical current (typically 375–500 kHz) delivered via a needle electrode, causing ionic agitation and frictional heating in the surrounding tissue. Temperatures of 60–100°C are achieved, resulting in coagulative necrosis and tumor cell death. The ablation zone is typically smaller and less predictable than with cryoablation, but RFA is effective for small to medium-sized lesions. Technique :The procedure is performed under CT or fluoroscopic guidance, with conscious sedation or general anesthesia. A radiofrequency electrode is advanced into the lesion, and energy is delivered for several minutes. Multiple ablations or repositioning may be required for larger tumors. Clinical Outcomes: RFA has been extensively studied for the palliation of painful bone metastases: Pain Relief: RFA achieves significant pain reduction in 60–80% of patients, with rapid onset (often within 1–2 weeks) and durable effect. The OsteoCool and STAR trials demonstrated sustained pain relief and improved function in large patient cohorts. Local Control: Local control rates are generally high for lesions <3 cm, but decrease with larger or more aggressive tumors. RFA is less effective for lesions with extensive cortical destruction or in weight-bearing bones at risk for fracture. Quality of Life: Patients report improved sleep, mobility, and reduced analgesic requirements. Safety Profile: RFA is safe and minimally invasive, with potential complications including thermal injury to adjacent structures (nerves, skin, bowel), fracture, transient post-procedural pain. As with cryoablation, meticulous planning and imaging guidance are critical. Comparative Effectiveness: Cryoablation vs. RFA Both cryoablation and RFA are effective for the palliation of painful bone metastases and local tumor control. Several comparative studies and meta-analyses have examined their relative advantages: Visualization: Cryoablation offers superior visualization of the ablation zone via the ice ball, allowing more precise targeting and margin assessment. RFA lacks this real-time feedback, increasing the risk of incomplete ablation or injury to adjacent structures. Lesion Size and Location: Cryoablation is preferred for larger lesions, lesions near critical structures, or when precise margins are needed. RFA is effective for smaller, well-circumscribed lesions. Pain Relief: Both modalities provide rapid and durable pain relief, with some studies suggesting slightly higher response rates with cryoablation. Complications: Both techniques have low complication rates, but cryoablation may carry a higher risk of fracture in weight-bearing bones due to larger ablation zones. Patient Selection and Indications Ideal candidates for percutaneous ablation are those with painful bone metastases refractory to conventional therapies (radiation, analgesics), lesions not amenable to surgery or further radiation, oligometastatic disease requiring local control, impending or established pathological fractures (in combination with cementoplasty).Contraindications include uncorrectable coagulopathy, infection at the planned entry site, or proximity to critical structures that cannot be protected. Combination Therapies Ablation techniques are often combined with other interventions for enhanced efficacy: Cementoplasty: Injection of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement after ablation stabilizes the bone, reduces fracture risk, and provides additional pain relief. Radiation Therapy: Ablation can be used before or after EBRT for synergistic effect, particularly in radioresistant tumors. Systemic Therapies: Ongoing systemic treatment is not a contraindication and may be continued as clinically indicated. Future Directions and Emerging Technologies Advances in ablation technology and imaging are expanding the role of minimally invasive treatments for bone metastases: Microwave Ablation (MWA): Offers larger and more uniform ablation zones, with potential advantages over RFA and cryoablation. Irreversible Electroporation (IRE): A non-thermal technique that preserves collagenous structures, potentially useful near nerves or joints. High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU): Non-invasive ablation using focused ultrasound waves, currently under investigation for bone metastases. Immunomodulation: Ablation-induced release of tumor antigens may enhance systemic anti-tumor immunity, especially in combination with immunotherapies. Ongoing clinical trials are assessing optimal patient selection, combination regimens, and long-term outcomes. Recent Guidelines and Consensus Statements Professional societies, including the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR), Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), endorse percutaneous ablation as a standard option for selected patients with painful bone metastases refractory to conventional treatments. Conclusion Cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation are safe, effective, and minimally invasive options for the local treatment of bone metastases, offering rapid pain relief, durable local control, and improved quality of life for patients with advanced cancer. Careful patient selection, multidisciplinary collaboration, and advances in technology will continue to refine their role in the management of skeletal metastases.References Kurup AN, Callstrom MR. Image-guided percutaneous ablation of bone and soft tissue tumors. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2010 Sep;27(3):276–84. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1261786.Moynagh MR, Kurup AN, Callstrom MR. Thermal ablation of bone metastases. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2018 Oct;35(4):299–308. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1673422. Epub 2018 Nov 5. Kurup AN, Callstrom MR. Ablation of skeletal metastases: current status. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010 Aug;21(8 Suppl):S242–50. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2010.05.001.Kurup AN, Schmit GD, Morris JM, et al. Avoiding complications in bone and soft tissue ablation. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017 Feb;40(2):166–176. doi: 10.1007/s00270-016-1487-y. Epub 2016 Nov 8.Kurup AN, Callstrom MR. Ablation of musculoskeletal metastases: pain palliation, fracture risk reduction, and oligometastatic disease. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 Dec;16(4):253–61. doi: 10.1053/j.tvir.2013.08.007.Callstrom MR, Kurup AN. Percutaneous ablation for bone and soft tissue metastases--why cryoablation? Skeletal Radiol. 2009 Sep;38(9):835–9. doi: 10.1007/s00256-009-0736-4.Razakamanantsoa L, Kurup AN, Callstrom MR, et al. Bone ablations in peripheral skeleton: rationale, techniques and evidence. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2022 Mar;25(1):100804. doi: 10.1016/j.tvir.2022.100804. Epub 2022 Jan 16.Hegg RM, Kurup AN, Schmit GD, et al. Cryoablation of sternal metastases for pain palliation and local tumor control. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014 Nov;25(11):1665–70. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2014.08.011. Epub 2014 Sep 23.Cazzato RL, de Rubeis G, de Marini P, et al. Percutaneous microwave ablation of bone tumors: a systematic review. Eur Radiol. 2021 May;31(5):3530–3541. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07382-8. Epub 2020 Nov 6.Cazzato RL, Garnon J, Caudrelier J, et al. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of painful spinal metastasis: a systematic literature assessment of analgesia and safety. Int J Hyperthermia. 2018 Dec;34(8):1272–1281. doi: 10.1080/02656736.2018.1425918. Epub 2018 Jan 17.Wallace AN, Robinson CG, Meyer J, et al. The metastatic spine disease multidisciplinary working group algorithms. Oncologist 2019 Mar;24(3):424. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0085err. Erratum for: Oncologist 2015 Oct;20(10):1205–15. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0085.Parvinian A, Welch BT, Callstrom MR, Kurup AN. Trends in musculoskeletal ablation: emerging indications and techniques. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020 Jun;23(2):100678. doi: 10.1016/j.tvir.2020.100678. Epub 2020 May 25. PMID: 32591190.Wallace AN, Tomasian A, Vaswani D, et al. Cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation for bone tumors. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2021;25(3):335–347. doi: - 1729590 de Baere T, Tselikas L, Woodrum D, et al. Evaluating cryoablation of metastatic lung tumors in patients--safety and efficacy: the ECLIPSE trial--interim analysis at 1 year. J Thorac Oncol. 2015 Oct;10(10):1468–74. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000632.Pusceddu C, De Francesco D, Ballicu N, et al. Safety and feasibility of steerable radiofrequency ablation in combination with cementoplasty for the treatment of large extraspinal bone metastases. Curr Oncol. 2022 Aug 20;29(8):5891–5900. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29080465.",
  "authors": [
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, AORN S.Anna e S. Sebastiano – Caserta, Caserta, Italy"
      ],
      "name": "Pasquale De Negri"
    },
    {
      "affiliations": [
        "Anaesthesia, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, AORN S.Anna e S. Sebastiano – Caserta, Caserta, Italy"
      ],
      "name": "Clara De Negri"
    }
  ],
  "title": "FT43 Bone metastasis – cryo and radiofrequency ablation",
  "uid": "4c9adc1a-c8eb-54b3-8020-0129ec1dc00b"
}