Twelve-Months Follow-up in Forty-Nine Patients With Acute/Semiacute Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures Treated Conservatively or With Percutaneous Vertebroplasty

Rousing, Rikke; Hansen, Karin Holmskov; Andersen, Mikkel; Jespersen, Stig; Thomsen, Karsten; Lauritsen, Jens

doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181b71bd1

Cited by 232 publications

(196 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

193

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Included Articles N=27 of the studies reported effects for the same group of patients and were combined into one analyzable ''study'' (Kasperk/Grafe et al, 4 total [11,12,24,25] and Rousing et al, 2 total [20,26]; see Table 1). This systematic review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement [27].…”

Section: Bkp Vs Nsm N=6mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing effects of kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, and non-surgical management in a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled studies

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To determine if differences in safety or efficacy exist between balloon kyphoplasty (BKP), vertebroplasty (VP) and non-surgical management (NSM) for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). Methods As of February 1, 2011, a PubMed search (key words: kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty) resulted in 1,587 articles out of which 27 met basic selection criteria (prospective multiple-arm studies with cohorts of C20 patients).This systematic review adheres to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.Results Pain reduction in both BKP (-5.07/10 points, P \ 0.01) and VP (-4.55/10, P \ 0.01) was superior to that for NSM (-2.17/10), while no difference was found between BKP/VP (P = 0.35). Subsequent fractures occurred more frequently in the NSM group (22 %) compared with VP (11 %, P = 0.04) and BKP (11 %, P = 0.01). BKP resulted in greater kyphosis reduction than VP (4.88 vs. 1.7°, P \ 0.01). Quality of life (QOL) improvement showed superiority of BKP over VP (P = 0.04), along with a trend for disability improvement (P = 0.08). Cement extravasation was less frequent in the BKP (P = 0.01). Surgical intervention within the first 7 weeks yielded greater pain reduction than VCFs treated later. Conclusions BKP/VP provided greater pain relief and fewer subsequent fractures than NSM in osteoporotic VCFs. BKP is marginally favored over VP in disability improvement, and significantly favored in QOL improvement. BKP had a lower risk of cement extravasation and resulted in greater kyphosis correction. Despite this analysis being restricted to Level I and II studies, significant heterogeneity suggests that the current literature is delivering inconsistent messages and further trials are needed to delineate confounding variables.

show abstract

Section: Bkp Vs Nsm N=6mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing effects of kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, and non-surgical management in a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled studies

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rousing et al 28 accompanied 49 patients with acute (less than two weeks) and subacute (between two and eight weeks) fractures from osteoporosis, 25 of whom had undergone PV and 24 of whom had undergone a non-surgical procedure, over a 12-month period, in a randomized clinical study. Pain was evaluated using a visual analog scale.…”

Section: A B Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of vertebral pathological fractures by percutaneous vertebroplasty

Macedo¹,

Linhares²

2014

Coluna/Columna

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate a consecutive series of patients undergoing vertebroplasty for pain control, according to results and complications in the short and medium follow-up. Methods: Retrospective analysis of medical records of 26 patients undergoing vertebroplasty from January 2007 to December 2010. Patients were evaluated by the questionnaire of assessment of low back pain (Oswestry Index) and the visual analog pain scale (VAS) on the day before surgery, on the second day and 12 months after the procedure. Results: Significant improvement of pain symptoms within 48 hours after surgery was reported in 22 patients (91.6%), two patients (8.32%) showed moderate improvement. Of the 22 patients with significant pain relief, 21 (95.4%) maintained the benefit and one (4.6%) had intense pain (new fracture in the body of L1) at a mean follow up of 12 months. Regarding the Oswestry Index, preoperative average was 52.9%. On the second day and 12 months after surgery this average was 23.6% and 24.5%, respectively; good results according to this index. Two patients were excluded from the study due to incomplete medical records. Conclusion: Despite the small sample size and short follow-up, the results of vertebroplasty were effective for the relief of pain symptoms and were safe as regards the risks of complications.Keywords: Low back pain; Spinal fractures; Osteoporosis; Vertebroplasty; Retrospective studies.

show abstract

“…However, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the clinical longterm efficacy and superiority of this technique in comparison with conservative treatment [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. Reported complications, possibly due to the addition of a material that is stiffer than the surrounding bone, include fractures of the augmented and adjacent vertebrae.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…New osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, in the months after VP, are reported in 7-63 % of VP patients, up to 82 % of these occur at the adjacent levels, with adjacent fractures occurring sooner than nonadjacent fractures; rates of recurrent fracture of the augmented vertebra itself range up to 63 % in the literature [1,[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. It is still under debate whether new vertebral fractures appear more often in patients who received cement augmentation than in conservatively treated patients; some studies support this hypothesis [1,6,7,[27][28][29], while others question it [2,3,26,30]. Reducing the augmentation volume [31], using low-modulus PMMA [32] and prophylactic augmentation of adjacent vertebrae [13,25,33] have been proposed as ways of minimizing the risk of subsequent fractures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical comparison of vertebral augmentation with silicone and PMMA cement and two filling grades

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Vertebral augmentation with PMMA is a widely applied treatment of vertebral osteoporotic compression fractures. Subsequent fractures are a common complication, possibly due to the relatively high stiffness of PMMA in comparison with bone. Silicone as an augmentation material has biomechanical properties closer to those of bone and might, therefore, be an alternative. The study aimed to investigate the biomechanical differences, especially stiffness, of vertebral bodies with two augmentation materials and two filling grades. Methods Forty intact human osteoporotic vertebrae (T10-L5) were studied. Wedge fractures were produced in a standardized manner. For treatment, PMMA and silicone at two filling grades (16 and 35 % vertebral body fill) were assigned to four groups. Each specimen received 5,000 load cycles with a high load range of 20-65 % of fracture force, and stiffness was measured. Additional low-load stiffness measurements (100-500 N) were performed for intact and augmented vertebrae and after cyclic loading. Results Low-load stiffness testing after cyclic loading normalized to intact vertebrae showed increased stiffness with 35 and 16 % PMMA (115 and 110 %) and reduced stiffness with 35 and 16 % silicone (87 and 82 %). After cyclic loading (high load range), the stiffness normalized to the untreated vertebrae was 361 and 304 % with 35 and 16 % PMMA, and 243 and 222 % with 35 and 16 % silicone augmentation. For both high and low load ranges, the augmentation material had a significant effect on the stiffness of the augmented vertebra, while the filling grade did not significantly affect stiffness. Conclusions This study for the first time directly compared the stiffness of silicone-augmented and PMMAaugmented vertebral bodies. Silicone may be a viable option in the treatment of osteoporotic fractures and it has the biomechanical potential to reduce the risk of secondary fractures.

show abstract

Twelve-Months Follow-up in Forty-Nine Patients With Acute/Semiacute Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures Treated Conservatively or With Percutaneous Vertebroplasty

Abstract: PVP is a good treatment for some patients with acute/subacute painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures, but the majority of fractures will heal after 8 to 12 weeks of conservative treatment with subsequent decline in pain. The risk of new fractures needs further research.

Cited by 232 publications

References 19 publications

Comparing effects of kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, and non-surgical management in a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled studies

Comparing effects of kyphoplasty, vertebroplasty, and non-surgical management in a systematic review of randomized and non-randomized controlled studies

Treatment of vertebral pathological fractures by percutaneous vertebroplasty

Biomechanical comparison of vertebral augmentation with silicone and PMMA cement and two filling grades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About