Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Percutaneous Vertebroplasty for Osteoporotic Compression Fractures

Takura, Tomoyuki; Yoshimatsu, Misako; Sugimori, Hiroki; Takizawa, Kenji; Furumatsu, Yoshiyuki; Ikeda, Hirotaka; Katô, Hiroshi; Ogawa, Yoshiaki; Hamaguchi, Shingo; Fujikawa, Atsuko; Sakurai, Toshihiko; Nakajima, Yasuo

doi:10.1097/bsd.0b013e3182aa4c29

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study has some limitations: (1) Due to the strict inclusion criteria in our study, the number of patients was relatively small; (2) The classification of the distribution type of bone cement using lateral radiographs only, the fine structure was not clearly observed; (3) Although the height of recovery and loss of the operative vertebral were observed, the follow-up time was short, and the evaluation was not comprehensive, especially in term of re-fracture after surgery.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures: a comparative study between transverse process root-pedicle approach and conventional transpedicular approach

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2021

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is a routine operation for the treatment of osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures (OLCFs). As is well known, unilateral puncture is a common method. However, with the conventional transpedicular approach (CTPA), the cement may be asymmetrically dispersed, so some surgeons use the transverse process root-pedicle approach (TPRPA). The objective of this study was to compare the clinical results and bone cement distribution of PVP for OLCF with unilateral TPRPA and CTPA to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the two surgical options. Patients and methods From January 2016 to June 2019, seventy-two elderly patients who underwent unilateral PVP for single-level OLCF were retrospectively reviewed. Operation time, injection amount and type of bone cement distribution, and bone cement leakage and surgical complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were used to evaluate the clinical results. All patients were followed up for more than 12 months, and the assessment was based primarily on clinical and radiological outcomes. Results There were significant differences in the surgical time and the volume and the type of bone cement distribution and the lost of operative vertebra height between the two groups. However, there was no significant difference in bone cement leakage. Moreover, there were no significant differences in VAS and ODI between the two groups at 2 days and 12 months after the operation. Conclusions Unilateral TPRPA and CTPA are practical and feasible methods in PVP for the treatment of OLCF, and they have similar clinical effects. However, TPRPA has the advantages of a better distribution of bone cement and a shorter operation time and a better maintenance effect of injured vertebra height, without increasing the rate of bone cement leakage.

show abstract

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The pain caused by the fracture significantly affects the patient's quality of life [1]. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is widely used to treat such fractures, which can rapidly maintain the strength of the injured vertebral body, effectively relieve pain, and improve the quality of life of the patients [2,3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures: a comparative study between transverse process root-pedicle approach and conventional transpedicular approach

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2021

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Osteoporotic vertebral fracture is one of the most common diseases of the elderly [1][2][3][4] . Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is widely used to treat painful vertebral compression fractures and strengthen the stability of vertebrae [5][6] . The usual standard in introduction of bone cement in PVP requires a bilateral pedicle approach to create a symmetrical distribution of bone cement [7] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of a flexible versus rigid bone cement injection system in unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty

li¹,

Cui²,

Zhou³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) has been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of acute osteoporotic vertebral fracture (AOVF). However, bilateral puncture takes more time to accept more X-ray irradiation; some scholars apply unilateral puncture PVP, but the cement cannot be symmetrically distributed in the vertebral body, so we use a flexible cement injector that undergoes PVP through the unilateral pedicle puncture. This research aims to compare the clinical results of PVP for AOVF with unilateral pedicle puncture using a straight bone cement injector and a bendable cement injector, determine the value of a bendable cement injector. Methods: We undertook a retrospective analysis of patients with thoracic and lumbar compression fracture treated with unilateral pedicle puncture Percutaneous vertebroplasty from our institution from June 2013 to July 2015. Operation time, radiation exposure, bone cement injection amount, and the incidence of bone cement leakage were recorded on presentation, the cement leakage was measured by x-ray and computed tomography scan. The patients were followed up postoperatively and were assessed mainly with regard to clinical and radiological outcomes. Results: There was no significant difference in the operation time, radiation exposure time and incidence of bone cement leakage between the two groups. There was significant difference in the amount of bone cement injection and the difference between the two groups. there were no significant differences in VAS and the relative height of the vertebral body and local Cobb angle and QUALEFFO between 2 groups at 1 week after PVP, only significant difference was observed between 12 months after operation. Conclusions: Application of flexible cement injector is safe and feasible,Compared with the application of straight bone cement injector, without prolonging the operative time, radiation exposure time and the incidence of bone cement leakage, it has the advantages of good long-term effect and low incidence of vertebral fracture recurrence.

show abstract

“…Osteoporotic vertebral fracture is one of the most common diseases of the elderly [ 1 – 4 ]. Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is widely used to treat painful vertebral compression fractures and strengthen the stability of vertebrae [ 5 , 6 ]. The usual standard in introduction of bone cement in PVP requires a bilateral pedicle approach to create a symmetrical distribution of bone cement [ 7 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of a flexible versus rigid bone cement injection system in unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty

Cui

Zhou

et al. 2020

Eur J Med Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) has been demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of acute osteoporotic vertebral fracture (AOVF). However, bilateral puncture takes more time to accept more X-ray irradiation; some scholars apply unilateral puncture PVP, but the cement cannot be symmetrically distributed in the vertebral body, so we use a flexible cement injector that undergoes PVP through the unilateral pedicle puncture. This research aims to compare the clinical results of PVP for AOVF with unilateral pedicle puncture using a straight bone cement injector and a bendable cement injector, determine the value of a bendable cement injector. Methods: We undertook a retrospective analysis of patients with thoracic and lumbar compression fracture treated with unilateral pedicle puncture percutaneous vertebroplasty from our institution from June 2013 to July 2015. Operation time, radiation exposure, bone cement injection amount, and the incidence of bone cement leakage were recorded on presentation, the cement leakage was measured by X-ray and computed tomography scan. The patients were followed up postoperatively and were assessed mainly with regard to clinical and radiological outcomes. Results: There was no significant difference in the operation time, radiation exposure time and incidence of bone cement leakage between the two groups. There was significant difference in the amount of bone cement injection and the difference between the two groups. There were no significant differences in VAS and the relative height of the vertebral body and local Cobb angle and QUALEFFO between the two groups at 1 week after PVP, significant difference was observed only 12 months after operation. Conclusions: Application of flexible cement injector is safe and feasible, compared with the application of straight bone cement injector, without prolonging the operative time, radiation exposure time and the incidence of bone cement leakage; it has the advantages of good long-term effect and low incidence of vertebral fracture recurrence.

show abstract

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Percutaneous Vertebroplasty for Osteoporotic Compression Fractures

Abstract: PVP may improve QOL and ameliorate pain for acute osteoporotic compression fractures and be cost-effective in Japan.

Cited by 19 publications

References 20 publications

Unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures: a comparative study between transverse process root-pedicle approach and conventional transpedicular approach

Unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures: a comparative study between transverse process root-pedicle approach and conventional transpedicular approach

Comparison of a flexible versus rigid bone cement injection system in unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty

Comparison of a flexible versus rigid bone cement injection system in unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About