PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Objectives
To determine MR findings that affect the bone cement leakage in patients with osteoporotic compressive fractures who are receiving percutaneous vertebroplasties and kyphoplasties.
Materials and Methods
A retrospective review was conducted on 105 patients with 131 vertebrae treated by percutaneous vertebroplasties (group 1: 66 patients and 78 cases) and kyphoplasties (group 2: 39 patients and 53 cases) from October 2001 to October 2005. The study was performed to determine whether cement leakage was related to any of the following MR findings: level of injured vertebra, severity of anterior height loss, posterior cortical disruption, endplate disruption, presence of either vacuum or cystic portions, linear sclerosis that was low in signal intensity in T1 and T2-weighted images.
Results
Bone cement leakage was detected in 51 (65.3%) of 78 treated vertebrae in group 1 and 18 (33.9%) of 53 treated vertebrae in group 2. There was a statistically significant difference between the incidences (p<0.05). Vertebral endplate disruption had a positive correlation in both groups (p<0.05). There was more cement leakage in group 1 (48.5%) than in group 2 (18.1%) in cases of endplate disruption (p<0.05). Vacuum or cystic change had negative correlations to bone cement leakage in group 1(p<0.05). No other MR findings demonstrated a statistically significant correlation with bone cement leakage.
Conclusion
On the MR findings, vertebral endplate disruption and vacuum or cystic change in fractured vertebrae demonstrated a significant correlation with bone cement leakage in group 1. There was relatively less cement leakage into the intervertebral spaces with kyphoplasties than with vertebroplasties in the cases of vertebral endplate disruption.
REFERENCES
01). Galibert P., Deramond H., Rosat P., Le Gars D. Pre-liminary note on the treatment of vertebral angioma by percutaneous acrylic vertebroplasty. Neurochirurgie. 1987. 33:166–168.
02). Barr JD., Barr MS., Lemley TJ., McCann RM. Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain relief and spinal stabi-lization. Spine. 2000. 15:923–928.
03). Jensen ME., Evans JM., Kallmes DF., Cloft HJ., Dion JE. Percutaneous polymethylmethacrylate vertebroplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral body compression fracture: technical aspects. Am J Neuroradiol. 1997. 18:1897–1904.
04). Kallmes DF., Jensen ME. Percutaneous vertebroplasty. Radiology. 2003. 229:27–36.
05). Phe WC., Gilula LA. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: indication and contraindications, and technique. Br J Radiol. 2003. 76:69–75.
06). Mckiernan TJ., Faciszewski T., Jensen R. Quality of life following vertebroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004. 86:2600–2606.
07). Kaufmann TJ., Jensen ME., Schweickert PA., Mark WF., Kallmes DF. Age of fracture and clinical outcomes of percutaneous vertebroplasty. Am J Neuroradiol. 2001. 22:1860–1863.
08). Phillips FM. Minimally invasive treatments of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Spine. 2003. 28:S45–S53.
09). Ryu KS., Park CK., Kim MC., Kang JK. Dose dependent epidural leakage of polymethylmethacrylate after percutaneous vertebroplasty in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. J Neurosurg Spine. 2002. 96:56–61.
10). Chae In Jung. Percutaneous vertebroplasty for spine fracture. J Korean Soc Spine Surg. 2000. 7:328–330.
11). Yu SW., Chen WJ., Lin WC., Chen YJ., Tu YK. Serious pyogenic spondylitis following vertebroplasty: a case report. Spine. 2004. 29:E209–E211.
12). Appel NB., Gilula LA. Percutaneous vertebroplasty in patients with spinal canal compromise. Am J Roentgenol. 2004. 182:947–951.
13). Lee BJ., Lee SR., Yoo TY. Paraplegia as a complication of percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate: a case report. Spine. 2002. 27:E419–E422.
14). Ratliff J., Nguyen T., Heiss J. Root and spinal cord compression form methylmethacrylate: a cast report. Spine. 2002. 27:E419–E422.
15). Groen RJ., du Toit DF., Phillips FM, et al. Anatomical and pathological considerations in percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty: a reappraisal of the vertebral venous system. Spine. 2004. 29:1465–1471.
16). Hostin R., carr J., Gupta MC., Hazelwood S., Dublin A. Importance of the Peridural Membrane in Percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005. 18:34–39.
17). Koh YH., Han DH., Choi YH, et al. MR predictors of bone cement leakage in patients receiving percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Korean Radiol Soc. 2005. 53:41–47.
18). Reidy D., Ahn H., Mousavi P., Finkelstein J., Whyne CM. A biomechanical analysis of intervertebral pressures during vertebroplasty of cadevaric spines with and without simu-lated metastasis. Spine. 2003. 28:1534–1539.
19). Lin EP., Ekholm S., Hiwatashi A., Westesson PL. Vertebroplasty: cement leakage into the disc increase the risk of new fracture of adjacent vertebral body. Am J Neuroradiol. 2004. 25:175–180.
20). Kim SH., Kang HS., Choi JA., Ahn JM. Risk factors of new compression fractures in adjacent vertebrae after percuta-neous vertebroplasty. Acta Radiol. 2004. 45:440–445.
21). Tsai TT., Chen WJ., Lai PL, et al. Polymethylmethacry-late cement dislodgement following percutaneous verte-broplasty: a case report. Spine. 2003. 28:E357–E460.
22). Harrington KD. Major neurological complications following percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001. 83:1070–1073.
23). Philips FM., Todd Wetzel F., Lieberman I., Campbell Hupp M. An in vivo comparison of the potential for extravertebral cement leak after vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty. Spine. 2002. 27:2173–2179.
24). Kelekis AD., Martin JB., Somon T., Wetzel SG., Dietrich PY., Ruefenacht DA. Radicular pain after vertebro-plasty: compression or irritation of the nerve root? Initial experience with the “cooling system”. Spine. 2003. 28:E265–E269.
25). Sarzier JS., Evans AJ. Intrathecal injection of contrast medium to prevent polymethylmethacrylate leakage during percutaneous vertebroplasty. Am J Neuroradiol. 2003. 24:1001–1002.
26). Mathis JM., Ortiz AO., Zoarski GH. Vertebroplasty ver-sus kyphoplasty: a comparison and contrast. Am J Neuroradiol. 2004. 25:840–845.
27). Mathis JM. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: complication avoidance and technique optimization. Am J Neuroradiol. 2003. 24:1697–1706.
28). Wenger M., Markwalder TM. Cement leakage and the need for prophylactic fenestration of the spinal canal during vertebroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002. 84:689–690.
29). Kim AK., Jensen ME., Dion JE., Schweickert PA., Kaufmann TJ., Kallmes DF. Unilateral transpedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty; initial experience. Radiology. 2002. 222:737–741.
30). Sun K., Liebschner MA. Biomechanics of prophylactic vertebral reinforcement. Spine. 2004. 29:1428–1435.
Fig. 1.
(A) The patient who is 75 years old female. She slipped down and complained back pain. Magnetic resonance images of tho-racic vertebra. T1 & T2 weighted images show a vertebral body signal change, vertebral anterior height loss and disruption of upper endplate (B) Intraoperative radiographs of injured vertebra treated with vertebroplasty show a leakage of bone cement into the intervertebral space.
Fig. 2.
(A) The patient who is 78 years old female. She slipped down and complained back pain. Magnetic resonance images of lum-bar vertebra. T1 & T2 weighted images show a vertebral body signal change, vertebral anterior height loss and disruption of upper endplate. (B). Postoperative radiographs of injured vertebra treated with kyphoplasty show a no leakage of bone cement via disrupted upper endplate.
XML Download