


SURGICAL INTERVENTION -- LONG BONES


The chance of developing a fracture increases with the duration and extent of tumor growth in the bone. The development of a fracture is devastating. It is vital that patients are routinely assessed by a specialist orthopedic and/or spinal surgeon to advise on prophylactic surgery. "A pathological long-bone fracture in a patient with known metastatic bone disease is really a reflection of inadequate clinical management."[5] Orthopedic management should enable intervention prior to fracture, enabling a simpler and safer operation.

"Fractures are common through lytic metastases and weight bearing bones, the proximal femora being the most commonly affected sites... Although controversial, several radiological features have been identified which may predict imminent fracture. These include pain, the anatomical site of a lesion, its radiological characteristics, and its size. Although the intensity of bone pain is not directly associated with fracture risk, pain that is exacerbated by movement does appear to be an important factor, which predicts impending fracture. Radiographic assessment gives information on the size of a lesion and the extent to which the bone is destroyed. When less than one-third of the diameter of a long bone is affected, pathological fracture is relatively unusual, but above this amount and especially when more than 50% of the cortex is destroyed, the fracture rate increases markedly to approximately 80%. A practical scoring system incorporating the above factors has been described to give valuable guidance in the selection of patients for prophylactic fixation."  [8]


Prior to surgery, bone isotope scans, Xrays of the entire affected bone, and possibly also MRI scans of the area, should be done.  Other bony lesions will be seen, stabilized, and included in the field of irradiation.  A pathologic fracture from a second metastasis at the edge of a plate or nail fixation of the first metastasis, is much more difficult to treat.  "Providing the lesion is irradiated, there is no evidence to suggest that surgery increases the risk of disseminating tumor cells either locally or into the circulation. If the patient is not fit for surgery, then radiotherapy and nonweight-bearing is indicated." [5]
 

A fracture because of a bony metastasis [pathologic fracture] does not necessarily mean the patient is terminally ill.  But untreated pathologic fractures rarely heal: large areas of bone destruction may not leave enough tissue for repair, and radiotherapy also inhibits fracture healing.  So primary internal stabilization followed by radiotherapy is usually the treatment of choice, and the most likely path to restore mobility as well as relieve pain. [5.87]

"Coincident with improved overall cancer palliation during the past 2 decades has been an increasing incidence of clinically apparent bone metastases, and from these metastases subsequent pathologic fractures of the long bones, spine, and pelvis. Current techniques for surgical management of these fractures are extremely effective in alleviating pain and allowing patients to resume an ambulatory status, often without the need of external support. This, in turn, has significantly improved the quality of the remaining months or years of these individuals' lives. In fact, the long term survival of patients after their first long bone pathologic fracture from malignancy has more than tripled for the most common cancers (breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, lymphomas, and myelomas) during the past 25 years. Surgical techniques for stabilizing pathologic or impending fractures must be individualized for the area of involvement, the particular qualities of the bone involved, and the potential for involvement of adjacent soft tissue structures. Long bone fractures most commonly occur in the femur and humerus and are typically internally fixed by intramedullary devices that control impaction, distraction, and torquing stresses by the use of proximal and distal interlocking fixation. Such fixation must be able to withstand weight-bearing stresses on lower extremity long bones. Upper extremity pathologic fractures are often subjected to distractive forces inherent in lifting and pulling, but they are also subjected to heavy compressive forces, particularly in patients who require crutches or other devices to assist them in walking. Fixation of upper or lower extremity long bone fractures ordinarily may be accomplished with minimal blood loss or morbidity. In contrast, fractures or impending fractures involving the acetabulum necessitate extensive joint reconstruction, with inherent increased potential for morbidity and complications. For this reason, the anticipated prognosis for survival and mobility should be greater preoperatively for patients with acetabular fractures than for patients with fractures of either upper or lower extremity long bones. ... Ninety-six percent of patients experience good or excellent relief of pain after internal fixation of pathologic malignant long bone fractures. Eighty-four percent of patients with acetabular fractures experience good or excellent relief of pain after joint reconstruction. ... Patients with pathologic fractures from metastatic carcinoma of the breast had a mean survival of 24.6 months after surgical management of their fractures. There was a similarly encouraging improvement in the survival statistics for patients with other primary tumor types. Most malignant pathologic fractures of the pelvis, long bones, or spine are amenable to effective stabilization by the techniques described in this article. These techniques allow resumption of weight-bearing ambulation in all but a few patients, good or excellent relief of pain in the vast majority, and an enhanced anticipation of survival and improvement in quality of life." [87] 


PubMed/Medline search for more information: Click on link:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=search&db=PubMed&term=long%20bone%20metastases%20surgical




SURGICAL INTERVENTION -- VERTEBRAL METASTASES
The spine is the commonest site for skeletal metastases.  Sometimes the vertebrae are invaded by direct extension of a nearby tumor in the lung, neck, or abdomen.  Sometimes the metastases arrive at the vertebrae by means of blood-borne spread, from the primary, through the lung circulation, to the peripheral circulation.  The tumor might possibly also spread to the vertebrae via a "third circulation", the Batson plexus, a network of deep pelvic veins with rich anastomoses [connections] to the vertebral plexus [another network of veins].  [1, 2]  
Metastatic tumors destroy vertebrae so that they spontaneously fracture [called a "pathologic" fracture].  If the vertebral pieces move out of alignment, they can cause major damage to the spinal cord, resulting in paralysis of the lower body [paraplegia] or all four limbs [quadriplegia], depending upon where the fracture is.  Metastases in the spine can also cause symptoms from tumors growing into the spinal canal and pressing upon the spinal cord.   Due to advances in spinal surgery, effective help often can be provided to these patients. The extent and type of surgical intervention, however, must be carefully considered in each individual case.  [3, 4] 
"The development of back pain in a patient with cancer, associated with an abnormality on a plain spinal radiograph, should serve as a warning for the possible development of spinal cord compression. In this situation more than 60% of patients will have myelographic abnormalities or evidence of epidural disease on magnetic resonance imaging. The key to successful rehabilitation is early diagnosis, high-dose corticosteroids, rapid assessment, and urgent referral for both decompression and spinal stabilization or radiotherapy. Neurological recovery is unlikely if the spinal compression is not relieved within 24-48 h."  [5] http://theoncologist.alphamedpress.org/cgi/content/full/5/6/463


"Spinal instability is a cause of back pain in approximately 10% of patients with metastatic bone disease. This can cause excruciating pain, which is mechanical in origin. The patient is only comfortable when lying absolutely still and any movement reproduces severe pain. Consequently, the patient may not be able to sit, stand or walk even with the use of a spinal support. Because the pain is due to the instability, radiotherapy or systemic treatment will not relieve the pain. As with a pathological long-bone fracture, stabilization is required for pain relief. This involves major surgery, which may be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There are several methods of spinal stabilization, but the posterior approach is technically easier and allows stabilization of a longer length of the spine. With careful selection of patients, excellent results can be obtained [6] 

Criteria for impending vertebral collapse have been described as:  "50-60% involvement of the vertebral body with no destruction of other structures, or 25-30% involvement with costovertebral joint destruction in the thoracic spine; and 35-40% involvement of vertebral body, or 20-25% involvement with posterior elements destruction in thoracolumbar and lumbar spine. ...  With respect to the timing and occurrence of vertebral collapse, there is a distinct discrepancy between the thoracic and thoracolumbar or lumbar spine. When a prophylactic treatment is required, the optimum timing and method of treatment should be selected according to the level and extent of the metastatic vertebral involvement. "[7]

Surgical intervention is the treatment of choice for unstable vertebrae or neurologic deficit, with the excision of the tumorous bone and stabilization of the spine.  "Coincident with improved overall cancer palliation during the past 2 decades has been an increasing incidence of clinically apparent bone metastases, and from these metastases subsequent pathologic fractures of the long bones, spine, and pelvis. Current techniques for surgical management of these fractures are extremely effective in alleviating pain and allowing patients to resume an ambulatory status, often without the need of external support. This, in turn, has significantly improved the quality of the remaining months or years of these individuals' lives. In fact, the long term survival of patients after their first long bone pathologic fracture from malignancy has more than tripled for the most common cancers (breast carcinoma, prostate carcinoma, lymphomas, and myelomas) during the past 25 years."  [87]
Generally, surgery is recommended, with tumor excision, and removal of tumorous parts or the entire vertebra.  It is recommended that surgery be done BEFORE there is major neurological deficit, as the results are much better.   "Surgical indications must be made at the first sign of deficit, regardless of the degree of compression present in the radiologic documentation, in order to avoid the transformation of reversible functional medullary changes into irreversible structural lesions."   [78]
Results of surgical excision of metastatic neoplastic disease and stabilization of the spine seem to be overwhelmingly positive.  Surgical intervention does prevent paraplegia, quadriplegia, and other neurologic deficit, as well as managing pain.  The surgical techniques are well developed, and hospitalizations are not long, but complications can occur, and hemorrhage is one of them.    Techniques vary, and can vary also with site of the tumor.  
Excisions dealing with LMS lesions should always be en bloc if it is at all possible.  That means that the tumor and its environs are removed in one resected piece, with wide margins.  There is no cutting into the tumor, or removing the tumor piecemeal.  [21, 30, 80, 111, 139]
"Embolization of vertebral metastases is a safe treatment prior to surgical resection. With appropriate monitoring, complications can be eliminated. The resulting devascularization allows for an aggressive resection of pathologic tissue."  As well as decreasing hemorrhagic complications.  [126]
"The spine is the commonest site for skeletal metastases. The majority of patients with spinal metastases can be managed conservatively, at least initially, but a significant number will develop complications, either neurological or mechanical, requiring surgical intervention. This paper emphasizes the need for a spinal surgeon to be involved early in the care of these patients...Post-operatively pain improved in 38 of the 42 patients (90%), the neurological deficit in 20 of the 29 patients with a deficit (69%) and the ambulatory ability in 25 of the 32 patients (78%) with very restricted mobility...: Identification of the cause of a patient's symptoms allows appropriate surgical intervention with favorable results." [36]
"Most spinal metastases can be managed conservatively. Those requiring surgical intervention present with progressive neurologic compromise, which requires decompression, or spinal instability, which requires stabilization. Constructs for internal stabilization of the spine must not be adversely affected by local postoperative irradiation. ... Eighty-two percent of patients with neurologic compromise secondary to vertebral malignancy improve at least one functional grade after decompression and stabilization, and 88% experience good or excellent relief of spinal pain with restoration of walking ability. Thirty-two percent survived for more than 2 years after spinal decompression and stabilization. Patients with pathologic fractures from metastatic carcinoma of the breast had a mean survival of 24.6 months after surgical management of their fractures. There was a similarly encouraging improvement in the survival statistics for patients with other primary tumor types. Most malignant pathologic fractures of the pelvis, long bones, or spine are amenable to effective stabilization by the techniques described in this article. These techniques allow resumption of weight-bearing ambulation in all but a few patients, good or excellent relief of pain in the vast majority, and an enhanced anticipation of survival and improvement in quality of life "[87]
Twenty-one patients between 39-71 years underwent reconstructive surgery for destructive spinal tumors. Tissue was removed with autogenous bone grafting with or without vertebral prosthesis resulting in early ambulation,  relief of pain, and neurological recovery reported in all.  There were no complications from surgery.  Surgical intervention is recommended where "reasonable longevity" is expected.  [17]
Surgical Complications:  In one study "90 patients underwent minimally invasive spinal surgery by thoracoscopic assistance as treatment for their anterior spinal lesions. A total of 30 complications were noted in 22 patients (24.4%). Two fatal complications occurred, resulting from massive blood transfusion in one case and postoperative pneumonia in another. Other nonfatal complications included four cases of transient intercostal neuralgia, three superficial wound infections, three cases of pharyngeal pain, two cases of lung atelectasis, two cases of residual pneumothorax, two cases of subcutaneous emphysema, one inadvertent pericardial penetration due to adhesion, one chylothorax that resolved after conservative management, one vertebral screw malposition, and one graft dislodgement that needed late revision surgery. Three patients required ventilatory support for longer than 72 hours. Five patients with spinal metastases had an estimated intraoperative blood loss of more than 2,000 ml. No injury to the internal organs or spinal cord was observed. There were four conversions to open procedures due to two cases of severe pleural adhesions and two poorly tolerated one-lung ventilation. At the latest follow-up, nine patients had died as a result of cancer dissemination. CONCLUSIONS: (a) Well-selected patients and attention to details are essential to optimizing surgical results. (b) A refined technique for less invasive tumor surgery has been developed. (c) Surgeons had better experience with the standard anterior spinal approach and showed no hesitation in converting to an open procedure when necessary. A procedure failure does not mean a treatment failure." [60] 
Children with vertebral metastases who are treated with chemo, radiation and laminectomy, and who survive longer than 2 months, will probably develop spinal deformity if spinal stabilization is not carried out. [155 ]

PubMed/Medline Search to obtain abstracts of references: Click on link:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=search&db=PubMed&term=vertebral%20metastases%20surgical   

Go To Top

References:  Surgical Management of Vertebral Tumors

1.  Oetiker RF et.al. Ther Umsch, Palliative surgery for bone metastases ,2001 Dec;58(12):738-45
2. Fleming MP et.al. Arch Pathol Lab Med , Myelophthisis as a solitary manifestation of failure from rectal carcinoma. A Batson phenomenon? ,2000 Aug;124(8):1228-30
3. Sim FH et.al., Ann Acad Med Singapore Metastatic bone disease: current concepts of clinicopathophysiology and modern surgical treatment. 1992 Mar; 21(2):274-9
4. Sanguinetti C , et.al. Chir Organi Mov The surgical treatment of spinal cord compression caused by tumorous metastases. A review of 91 cases. 1998 Jan-Jun;83(1-2):113-25
5. Coleman R., The Oncologist, Vol. 5, No. 6, 463-470, December 2000, (c) 2000 AlphaMed Press.
6. Healey JH, Brown HK. Complications of bone metastases-surgical management." [Cancer 2000;88(suppl 12):2940-2951
7. Taneichi H, Kaneda K, Takeda N, Abumi K, Satoh S , Risk factors and probability of vertebral body collapse in metastases of the thoracic and lumbar spine. Spine 1997 Feb 1;22(3):239-45
8.  Mirels H. Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring system for diagnosing impending pathological fracture. Clin Orthop   1989;249:256-264
17: Hussein AA, El-Karef E, Hafez M.   Eur J Surg Oncol 2001 Mar;27(2):196-9 Reconstructive surgery in spinal tumours. 
30: Boriani S, Bandiera S, Biagini R, et. al.
Chir Organi Mov 2000 Oct-Dec;85(4):309-35. The use of the carbon-fiber reinforced modular implant for the reconstruction of the anterior column of the spine. A clinical and experimental study conducted on 42 cases. 
31: Schulte M, Schultheiss M, et. al., Eur Spine J 2000 Oct;9(5):437-44, Vertebral body replacement with a bioglass-polyurethane composite in spine metastases--clinical, radiological and biomechanical results.  
36: Hatrick NC, Lucas JD, et.al., Radiother Oncol 2000 Sep;56(3):335-9, The surgical treatment of metastatic disease of the spine. 
37: Bilsky MH, Boland P, et. al., Spine 2000 Sep 1;25(17):2240-9,discussion 250, Single-stage posterolateral transpedicle approach for spondylectomy, epidural decompression, and circumferential fusion of spinal metastases. 
46: Merk H, Koch H, et. al. , Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2000 Mar-Apr;138(2):169-73, Implantation of a Harms titanium mesh cylinder for vertebral body replacement in spinal metastases. 
60: Huang TJ, Hsu RW, et. al., Complications in thoracoscopic spinal surgery: a study of 90 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 1999 Apr;13(4):346-50
61: Giehl JP, Kluba T., Anticancer Res 1999 Mar-Apr;19(2C):1619-23, Metastatic spine disease in renal cell carcinoma--indication and results of surgery.  
63: Janusz W, Mosiewicz A, et. al., Neurol Neurochir Pol 1999 Mar-Apr;33(2):403-12, Metastatic tumors in vertebral canal, 
65: Okuyama T, Korenaga D, et. al., J Surg Oncol 1999 Jan;70(1):60-3, Quality of life following surgery for vertebral metastases from breast cancer.  
67: Villas C, Arriagada C, et. al., Rev Med Univ Navarra 1998 Oct-Dec;42(4):188-93,  Surgical treatment of vertebral metastasis. 70: Ther Umsch 1998 Jul;55(7):418-22 , Orthopedic aspects of vertebral metastases. Heini PF.   
72: Been HD, van Ooij A, Veraart BE, Slot GH.   Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1998 May 2;142(18):1009-15,  One hundred years of orthopedics in the Netherlands. IV. Spinal abnormalities.  
74: Dominkus M, Krepler P, Schwameis E, Kotz R Orthopade 1998 May;27(5):282-6, Surgical therapy of spinal metastases,  
76: Klekamp J, Samii H.  , Acta Neurochir (Wien) 1998;140(9):957-67 , Surgical results for spinal metastases. 
78: Sanguinetti C, Aulisa L, et.al., Chir Organi Mov 1998 Jan-Jun;83(1-2):113-25  The surgical treatment of spinal cord compression caused by tumorous metastases. A review of 91 cases. 
80: Boriani S, Biagini R, De Iure F, et.al., Chir Organi Mov 1998 Jan-Jun;83(1-2):53-64 Resection surgery in the treatment of vertebral tumors. 
81: Cappelletto B, Del Fabro P, Meo A., Chir Organi Mov 1998 Jan-Jun;83(1-2):167-76  Decompression and surgical stabilization in the palliative treatment of vertebral metastases. 
87: Harrington KD.   Cancer 1997 Oct 15;80(8 Suppl):1614-27 , Orthopedic surgical management of skeletal complications of malignancy. 
98:  Bauer HC.  J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997 Apr;79(4):514-22    Comment in: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998 Sep;80(9):1396. Posterior decompression and stabilization for spinal metastases. Analysis of sixty-seven consecutive patients. 
108: Olerud C, Jonsson B.  et.al., Acta Orthop Scand 1996 Oct;67(5):513-22  Surgical palliation of symptomatic spinal metastases. 
110: Sundaresan N, Steinberger AA, Moore F, et.al., J Neurosurg 1996 Sep;85(3):438-46, Indications and results of combined anterior-posterior approaches for spine tumor surgery. 
121: Onimus M, Papin P, et. al., Eur Spine J 1996;5(6):407-11, Results of surgical treatment of spinal thoracic and lumbar metastases. 
123:  Hosono N, Yonenobu K, et.al., Spine 1995 Nov 15;20(22):2454-62 Vertebral body replacement with a ceramic prosthesis for metastatic spinal tumors. 
124: Plotz W, Wicke-Wittenius S, et. al.,  Fortschr Med 1995 Nov 10;113(31):437-40 Vertebral replacement in palliative tumor therapy. Possible surgical procedures--significant improvement in quality of life. 
126: Breslau J, Eskridge JM.    J Vasc Interv Radiol 1995 Nov-Dec;6(6):871-5  Preoperative embolization of spinal tumors.  
129: Hosono N, Yonenobu K, Fuji T, Ebara S, et.al., Clin Orthop 1995 Mar;(312):148-59 Orthopaedic management of spinal metastases. 
139: Tomita K, Kawahara N, Baba H, Tsuchiya H, Nagata S, Toribatake Y. Total en bloc spondylectomy for solitary spinal metastases.  Int Orthop 1994 Oct;18(5):291-8 
151: Toma S, Venturino A, Sogno G, et.al., Clin Orthop 1993 Oct;(295):246-51 Metastatic bone tumors. Nonsurgical treatment. Outcome and survival.  
155: Freiberg AA, Graziano GP, et. al.  Metastatic vertebral disease in children. J Pediatr Orthop 1993 Mar-Apr;13(2):148-53

Go To Top



Radio Frequency Ablation


RFA     Further information about RFA treatment is on the RFA page.

Radiofrequency thermal ablation (RFA) is a new minimally invasive treatment for localized cancer, which can be done percutaneously.  "Minimally invasive surgical options require less resources, time, recovery, and cost, and often offer reduced morbidity and mortality, compared with more invasive methods "  It is safe, simple, and effective. [8, 1, 2, 6, 7]  RFA can ablate inoperable painful metastatic spinal tumors, and relieve pain, relieve or prevent neurologic deficit, and ablate the tumor so there is no further tumor growth. [9]

"Image-guided, local cancer treatment relies on the assumption that local disease control may improve survival. Recent developments in ablative techniques are being applied to patients with inoperable, small, or solitary liver tumors, recurrent ... renal cell carcinoma, and neoplasms in the bone, lung, breast, and adrenal gland. ... Recent refinements in ablation technology enable large tumor volumes to be treated with image-guided needle placement, either percutaneously, laparoscopically, or with open surgery. Local disease control potentially could result in improved survival, or enhanced operability." [8] 

Consensus indications for use of RFA in oncology are currently ill-defined, despite widespread use of the technique.  "More rigorous scientific review, long-term follow-up, and randomized prospective trials are needed to help define the role of RFA in oncology."  [8] 


More Information:
Pubmed search for Radio Frequency Ablation on Bone.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=search&db=PubMed&term=bone%20radio%20frequency%20ablation
              

References:
              1: Radiology 1992 Apr;183(1):29-33   Ablation of osteoid osteomas with a percutaneously placed electrode: a new procedure. Rosenthal DI, Alexander A, Rosenberg AE, Springfield D. PMID: 1549690 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] 
              2: J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001 Apr;83(3):391-6  Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in osteoid osteoma. Lindner NJ, Ozaki T, Roedl R, Gosheger G,  Winkelmann W, Wortler K.   PMID: 11341426 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] 
              3: Radiol Med (Torino) 2001 Nov-Dec;102(5-6):329-34  [Percutaneous radio-frequency ablation of osteoid osteoma: technique and preliminary results] [Article in Italian] Gallazzi MB, Arborio G, Garbagna PG, Perrucchini G, Daolio PA. PMID: 11779979 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] 
              4: Radiology 2001 Nov;221(2):463-8 Primary treatment of chondroblastoma with percutaneous radio-frequency heat ablation: report of three cases.Erickson JK, Rosenthal DI, Zaleske DJ, Gebhardt MC, Cates JM. PMID: 11687691 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
  5: J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998 Jun;80(6):815-21  Percutaneous radiofrequency coagulation of osteoid osteoma compared with operative treatment. Rosenthal DI, Hornicek FJ, Wolfe MW, Jennings LC, Gebhardt MC, Mankin HJ. PMID: 9655099 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] 
              6: Eur Spine J 1998;7(5):422-5     High-frequency radio-wave ablation of osteoid osteoma in the lumbar spine.  Osti OL, Sebben R. PMID: 9840478 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
              7: Radiology 1995 Nov;197(2):451-4  Osteoid osteoma: percutaneous radio-frequency ablation. Rosenthal DI, Springfield DS, Gebhardt MC, Rosenberg AE, Mankin HJ. PMID: 7480692 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
	 8. Cancer 2002 Jan 15;94(2):443-51  Percutaneous tumor ablation with radiofrequency. Wood BJ, Ramkaransingh JR, Fojo T, Walther MM, Libutti SK. 
Diagnostic Radiology Department, Special Procedures Division, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA. bwood@nih.gov 
PMID: 11900230 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] 
      9. Dietrich H.W. Gronemeyer,M.D. et.al  The Cancer Journal Vol.8, No.1, Institute of MicroTherapy and the Department of Radiology and Microtherapy, University of Witten/Herdecke, Germany. EFMT Development and Research Center for Microtherapy in Bochum, Germany.

        
Go To To

Cryoablation

"The technological advances which have caused renewed interest in cryosurgery are the development of intraoperative ultrasound to monitor the therapeutic process and the development of new cryosurgical equipment designed to use supercooled liquid nitrogen. The thin, highly efficient probes, available in several sizes, can be placed in diseased sites via endoscopy or percutaneously in minimally invasive procedures. The manner of use is to place the probe in the desired location in the diseased tissue with ultrasound guidance. If required by the size or location of the tumor, as many as five probes can be inserted and cooled to -195 degrees C simultaneously. The process of freezing is monitored by ultrasound which displays a hypoechoic (dark) image when the tissue if frozen. Rapid freezing, slow thawing, and repetition of the freeze/thaw cycle are standard features of technique." [1]
"The cases selected for cryosurgery are generally those for which no conventional treatment is possible.  ... Diverse tumors [in sites] such as the brain, bronchus, bone, pancreas, kidney, and uterus, have ... been treated in small numbers by cryosurgery. Judging from this experience, further expansion in the use of cryosurgical techniques seems certain." [1] 
1. Cryobiology 1997 Jun;34(4):373-84
Minimally invasive cryosurgery--technological advances. 
Baust J, Gage AA, Ma H, Zhang CM. 
Center for Cryobiological Research State University of New York, Binghamton 13902, USA. 
PMID: 9200822 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] 

For more information, click on the pubmed search:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=search&db=PubMed&term=cryoablation%20bone%20cancer



