Purpose There is still debate over whether vertebroplasty (VP) or kyphoplasty (KP) is superior for the treatment of osteoporosis vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials comparing VP with KP to reach a relatively conclusive answer. Methods We searched computerised databases comparing efficacy and safety of VP and KP in osteoporotic fractures. These trials reported pain relief (Visual Analogue Scale), disability (Oswestry disability score) and complications (i.e., cement leakage, incident fractures) as the primary outcome. Results Eight studies involving 848 patients were identified. The outcome showed that VP is more effective in the short-term (no more than seven days) pain relief. Kyphoplasty had a superior capability for intermediateterm (around three months) functional improvement. As for long-term pain relief and functional improvement, there is no significant difference between these two interventions. Consistently, both interventions have similar risk for subsequent fracture and cement leakage. Conclusion Thus considering the higher cost of the KP procedure, we recommend VP over KP for the treatment of osteoporotic VCFs.
Unilateral and bilateral percutaneous kyphoplasties appear to be safe and effective for treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. No clinically important differences were found between them. Considering less operation time and less cost, we suggest that a unilateral percutaneous kyphoplasty is advantageous, but because of the poor quality of the evidence, high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to resolve this issue.
Background:This study was designed to evaluate the efficiency and tolerability of empagliflozin (EMPA) as monotherapy or add-on to existing therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Methods:Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing efficacy and safety of EMPA vs placebo or EMPA plus other antidiabetes drugs vs placebo plus other oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) in T2DM were recruited from electronic database Pubmed, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), supplemented by a hand search of the reference lists of selected articles. Main effect sizes were change from baseline on glycemia control, body weight, blood pressure, and complications (i.e., incidence of urinary and genital tract infections, and morbidity of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia). Random-effects model was used to account for clinical or methodologic heterogeneity across studies.Results:Fifteen RCTs with a total number of 7891 individuals (5374 in EMPA group and 2517 in control group) were suitable for this meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that significant improvements in glycemia control, body weight, and blood pressure were associated with EMPA application (i.e., monotherapy and add-on therapy) in patient with T2DM when compared with placebo. Meanwhile, EMPA 10 and 20 mg improved glycemia, body weight, and blood pressure control for patients with T2DM. There was no significant difference in incidence of hypoglycemia and urinary tract infections across EMPA and placebo group. Significant reduced risk of hyperglycemia was revealed in EMPA group vs placebo (risk ratio: 0.34, 95%confidence interval: 0.23–0.49, P < .00001), except in patients on background insulin therapy. However, increased risk of genital infection was noted across EMPA vs placebo (risk ratio: 2.59, 95% confidence interval: 1.80–3.71, P < .00001).Conclusion:Our evidence supports the application of EMPA in treatment of patients with T2DM who are obesity or at risk of weight gain.
Our results do not support the hypothesis that vertebroplasty contributes to increased risk of subsequent vertebral fracture, neither adjacent nor total vertebral fracture. However, adequately designed randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm the present findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.