Percutaneous Vertebroplasty

Álvarez, Luis; Alcaraz, M. Mata; Pérez-Higueras, Antonio; Jj, Granizo; Miguel, de; Re, Rossi; Quiñones, D.

doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000216487.97965.38

Cited by 211 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The followup point at which the difference becomes insignificant varies between studies at 3 mo [51] , 6 mo [52] or 1 year [53] . Regarding Kyphoplasty, two prospective controlled studies evaluated and compared the efficacy and safety of this technique vs medical management and found better longterm pain relief and superior functional outcome with kyphoplasty, up to 3 years [54,55] .…”

Section: Clinical Success Of Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplastymentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparative review of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty

Santiago¹,

Chinchilla²,

Álvarez³

et al. 2014

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this review is to compare the effectiveness of percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty to treat pain and improve functional outcome from vertebral fractures secondary to osteoporosis and tumor conditions. In 2009, two open randomized controlled trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine questioned the value of vertebroplasty in treating vertebral compression fractures. Nevertheless, the practice of physicians treating these conditions has barely changed. The objective of this review is to try to clarify the most important issues, based on our own experience and the reported evidence about both techniques, and to guide towards the most appropriate choice of treatment of vertebral fractures, although many questions still remain unanswered.

show abstract

Section: Clinical Success Of Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplastymentioning

confidence: 98%

Comparative review of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty

Santiago¹,

Chinchilla²,

Álvarez³

et al. 2014

WJR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Restoration of the physiological vertebral body height for pain relief and for preventing further fractures of adjacent und distant vertebral bodies must be the main aim for such a method [4-6]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiographic and safety details of vertebral body stenting: results from a multicenter chart review

Diel

Röder

Perler

et al. 2013

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUp to one third of BKP treated cases shows no appreciable height restoration due to loss of both restored height and kyphotic realignment after balloon deflation. This shortcoming has called for an improved method that maintains the height and realignment reached by the fully inflated balloon until stabilization of the vertebral body by PMMA-based cementation. Restoration of the physiological vertebral body height for pain relief and for preventing further fractures of adjacent and distant vertebral bodies must be the main aim for such a method. A new vertebral body stenting system (VBS) stabilizes the vertebral body after balloon deflation until cementation. The radiographic and safety results of the first 100 cases where VBS was applied are presented.MethodsDuring the planning phase of an ongoing international multicenter RCT, radiographic, procedural and followup details were retrospectively transcribed from charts and xrays for developing and testing the case report forms. Radiographs were centrally assessed at the institution of the first/senior author.Results100 patients (62 with osteoporosis) with a total of 103 fractured vertebral bodies were treated with the VBS system. 49 were females with a mean age of 73.2 years; males were 66.7 years old. The mean preoperative anterior-middle-posterior heights were 20.3-17.6-28.0 mm, respectively. The mean local kyphotic angle was 13.1°. The mean preoperative Beck Index (anterior edge height/posterior edge height) was 0.73, the mean alternative Beck Index (middle height/posterior edge height) was 0.63. The mean postoperative heights were restored to 24.5-24.6-30.4 mm, respectively. The mean local kyphotic angle was reduced to 8.9°. The mean postoperative Beck Index was 0.81, the mean alternative one was 0.82. The overall extrusion rate was 29.1%, the symptomatic one was 1%. In the osteoporosis subgroup there were 23.8% extrusions. Within the three months followup interval there were 9% of adjacent and 4% of remote new fractures, all in the osteoporotic group.ConclusionsVBS showed its strengths especially in realignment of crush and biconcave fractures. Given that fracture mobility is present, the realignment potential is sound and increases with the severity of preoperative vertebral body deformation.

show abstract

“…The studies were classified in different categories based on the level of evidence and grades of recommendation in support of using PV or PK according to the clinical guidelines of North America Spine Society (NASS) – (i) Level I studies with consistent findings ( Good Evidence ); (ii) Level II or III studies with consistent findings ( Fair Evidence ); (iii) Level IV or V with consistent findings ( Poor Quality Evidence ); and (iv) studies with inconsistent findings or lack of evidence ( Insufficient Evidence ) [74]. According to the level of evidence rated by NASS, among 74 published articles on PV until 2008, only 1 article classifies as Level I (randomized control trial) [75], 3 articles qualify for Level II (nonrandomized control trials) [76–78], while the remaining 70 classify as Level IV [79–86] (only a few representative references are cited here; for a comprehensive list please refer to the review by McGirt et al 2009). No other randomized control trials have been performed for PV, with the exception of the study by Voormoloen et al [75], until 2008.…”

Section: Vertebroplasty Vs Kyphoplastymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the Level II studies mentioned above [76–78], there was immediate pain relief and greater improvement in physical functioning in the PV group. However, there were no differences in PV and OPM groups in terms of VAS (visual analog score for back pain) or Barthel functional Index at 1, 5, 6, 12, or 24 months.…”

Section: Vertebroplasty Vs Kyphoplastymentioning

confidence: 99%

Current status of percutaneous vertebroplasty and percutaneous kyphoplasty – a review

Yang

Ren

et al. 2013

Med Sci Monit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) and kyphoplasty (PK) are the 2 vertebral augmentation procedures that have emerged as minimally invasive surgical options to treat painful vertebral compression fractures (VCF) during the last 2 decades. VCF may either be osteoporotic or tumor-associated. Two hundred million women are affected by osteoporosis globally. Vertebral fracture may result in acute pain around the fracture site, loss of vertebral height due to vertebral collapse, spinal instability, and kyphotic deformity. The main goal of the PV and PK procedures is to give immediate pain relief to patients and restore the vertebral height lost due to fracture. In percutaneous vertebroplasty, bone cement is injected through a minimal incision into the fractured site. Kyphoplasty involves insertion of a balloon into the fractured site, followed by inflation-deflation to create a cavity into which the filler material is injected, and the balloon is taken out prior to cement injection. This literature review presents a qualitative overview on the current status of vertebral augmentation procedures, especially PV and PK, and compares the efficacy and safety of these 2 procedures. The review consists of a brief history of the development of these 2 techniques, a discussion on the current research on the bone cement, clinical outcome of the 2 procedures, and it also sheds light on ongoing and future research to maximize the efficacy and safety of vertebral augmentation procedures.

show abstract

Percutaneous Vertebroplasty

Abstract: PV demonstrated a rapid and significant relief of pain and improved the quality of life. PV election for treatment of painful osteoporotic vertebral fracture after 6 weeks of conservative treatment was based on pain and functional impairment.

Cited by 211 publications

References 22 publications

Comparative review of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty

Comparative review of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty

Radiographic and safety details of vertebral body stenting: results from a multicenter chart review

Current status of percutaneous vertebroplasty and percutaneous kyphoplasty – a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About