PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Objectives
To compare the outcome of percutaneous vertebroplasty (VP) and conservative treatment for the treatment of acute painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCF).
Summary of Literature Review
Vertebroplasty is a common procedure for the treatment of acute painful osteoporotic VCF. However, controversy still exists regarding clinical outcomes of the procedure compared with more conservative treatment.
Material and Methods
A consecutive group of patients, undergoing VP and conservative treatment at our hospital, between July 2005 and October 2008, were reviewed retrospectively. All patients were reviewed with at least 1 year of follow up. A total of 58 patients underwent 59 VP procedures under local anesthesia at post injury 2 weeks; a total of 31 underwent conservative treatment. These two groups were compared by the kyphotic angle and loss of vertebral body height at immediate post-injury, post-injury 6weeks and 1y ear, radiologically. And they were compared by the visual analog scale(VAS) score and ambulatory status at the same time, clinically.
Results
At the time of immediate post-injury, six weeks after post-injury, one year after injury, height loss was 29.73%, 19.81%, 22.59% in the VP group, respectively, and 31.20%, 36.80%, 40.60% in the conservative treatment group, respectively. The Kyphotic angles were 13.44°, 9.10°, 11.31° in VP group, respectively, and 10.29°, 15.83°, 19.00° in the conservative treatment group, respectively. There was a statistically significant reduction of height loss and kyphotic angle in VP group at post-injury of 6 weeks and 1 year(p<0.05). At the same time, VAS scores were 9.41, 4.32, 2.47 in the VP group, respectively, and 9.50, 6.25, 2.71 in conservative treatment group, respectively. Ambulation status was 3.61, 1.46, 1.22 in the VP group, respectively, and 3.65, 2.45, 1.32 in the conservative treatment group, respectively. There was a statistically significant reduction of VAS score and improved ambulation status in VP group at post-6 weeks, but no difference between two groups at post 1 year. There was no significant difference in new fractures of adjacent vertebrae between the two groups (p>0.05).
Conclusions
VP prevents further collapse and kyphosis relieves pain quickly and allows early ambulation, but in post-injury 1 year follow up, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes. Proper treatment should be done with respect to patient's age, general condition, economic status and complication.
REFERENCES
1. Choi SK, Kim KY, Yim MS, Lee DY. Treatment of osteoporotic stable fracture with percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Korean Fract Soc. 2006; 19:247–53.
2. Bará th K, Martin JB, Fasel HJ, et al. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: methods, indications, results. Orv Hetil. 2002; 143:2469–77.
3. Barr JD, Barr MS, Lemley TJ, McCann RM. Percutaneous vertebroplasty for pain relief and spinal stabilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25:923–8.
4. Deramond H, Depriester C, Galibert P, Le Gars D. Percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate. Technique, indications, and results. Radiol Clin North Am. 1998; 36:533–46.
5. Gangi A, Guth S, Imbert JP, Marin H, Dietmann JL. Percutaneous vertebroplasty: indications, technique, and results. Radiographics. 2003; 23:E10.
6. Jang SB, Kim MH, Min SH, Paik HD. Neurologic complication after percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate. J Korean Soc Spine Surg. 2007; 14:101–4.
7. Moon SH, Lee SW, Suh BH, Kim SH. Large Pulmonary Embolus after Percutaneous Vertebroplasty: A Case Report. J Korean Soc Spine Surg. 2009; 16:46–9.
8. Kim MH, Min SH, Jeon SH. Risk factors of new compression fractures in adjacent vertebrae after percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Korean Fract Soc. 2007; 20:260–5.
9. Buchbinder R, Osborne RH, Ebeling PR, et al. A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361:557–68.
10. Kallmes DF, Comstock BA, Heagerty PJ, et al. A randomized trial of vertebroplasty for osteoporotic spinal fractures. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361:569–79.
11. Moon SH, Kim DJ, Hwang CS, Lee SE, Park SW. A comparison of vertebroplasty versus conservative treatment in osteoporotic compression fractures. J Korean Fract Soc. 2004; 17:374–9.
12. Na HY, Cho HW, Kim SK, Lee SY. Comparison of outcome between percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty for osteoporotic painful vertebral compression fracture. J Korean Soc Spine Surg. 2003; 10:127–36.
13. Kim CH, Choi YJ, Baek SK, et al. Vertebroplasty on osteoporotic compression fracture. J Korean Fract Soc. 2003; 15:123–8.
14. Diamond TH, Champion B, Clark WA. Management of acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Am J Med. 2003; 114:257–65.
15. Rousing R, Andersen MO, Jespersen SM, Thomsen K, Lauritsen J. Percutaneous vertebroplasty compared to conservative treatment in patients with painful acute or subacute osteoporotic vertebral fractures: three-months followup in a clinical randomized study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34:1349–54.
16. Wang HK, Lu K, Liang CL, et al. Comparing clinical outcomes following percutaneous vertebroplasty with conservative therapy for acute osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. Pain Med. 2010; 11:1659–65.
17. Weill A, Chiras J, Simon JM, Rose M, Sola-Martinez T, Enkaoua E. Spinal metastasis: indications for and results of percutaneous injection of acrylic surgical cement. Radiology. 1996; 199:241–7.
18. Berlemann U, Ferguson SJ, Nolte LP, Heini PF. Adjacent vertebral failure after vertebroplasty. A biomechanical investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002; 84:748–52.
19. Uppin AA, Hirsch JA, Centenera LV, Pfiefer BA, Pazianos AG, Choi IS. Occurrence of new vertebral body fracture after percutaneous vertebroplasty in patients with osteoporosis. Radiology. 2003; 226:119–24.
Table 1.
The clinical and dermographic data of each group with or without vertebroplasty.
Table 2.
Radiologic outcomes of each group with or without vertebroplasty
Table 3.
Clinical outcomes of each group with or without vertebroplasty
XML Download