Jyi-Feng Chen1, Shih-Tseng Lee. 1. Department of Neurousrgery, Chang Gung University & Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous vertebroplasty can be very beneficial for patients with vertebral osteoporotic compression fractures. To the best of our knowledge, however, there has been no mention in any literature regarding the use of percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of spinal burst fracture. METHODS: A preliminary study was conducted on 6 patients with traumatic burst fractures of vertebrae treated with percutaneous vertebroplasty starting in June 2000. Fractures involving the anterior and middle columns of the vertebrae and the canal were mildly compressed by the retropulsed bone fragment. However, there was no obvious neurologic deficit in these patients. They initially underwent conservative treatment and thoracolumbar spinal orthosis (TLSO) brace for at least 3 months, but the intractable pain caused patients to be bedridden for prolonged periods of time and limited daily activity. As a result, the patients underwent percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) for treatment of spinal burst fractures. RESULTS: Six male patients (mean age: 38.2) who suffered from burst fractures of vertebrae with disabling back pain refractory to analgesic therapy and TLSO brace were treated in this study. The duration of conservation treatment period was 3.5 months to 8 months (mean: 5.2 months). There was no motility. However, 4 vertebrae (66.7%), on radiographs revealed evidence of PMMA leakage through the endplate fracture site into either the disc space or the paravertebral space, without any evident clinical symptoms. No intracanal leakage was seen, and no patient needed a secondary surgical intervention. Pain decreased from 84.3 +/- 5.4 mm at baseline to 34.7 +/- 4.4 mm at the third postoperative day, 30.2 +/- 5.8 at 3 months and 24 +/- 3.5 mm at 12 months. The reduction in pain from baseline to the 3-day and 3 month mark was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The mobility was at least 2 levels of improvement (mean improvement 2.7 points) at 12-months postoperative. CONCLUSION: In highly selective patients, percutaneous vertebroplasty can be an alternative method for the treatment of spinal burst fractures and the prevention of complications from major surgical procedures. However, this procedure still has potential risks and should be employed with extreme caution to prevent extravasation of PMMA into the spinal canal.
OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous vertebroplasty can be very beneficial for patients with vertebral osteoporotic compression fractures. To the best of our knowledge, however, there has been no mention in any literature regarding the use of percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of spinal burst fracture. METHODS: A preliminary study was conducted on 6 patients with traumatic burst fractures of vertebrae treated with percutaneous vertebroplasty starting in June 2000. Fractures involving the anterior and middle columns of the vertebrae and the canal were mildly compressed by the retropulsed bone fragment. However, there was no obvious neurologic deficit in these patients. They initially underwent conservative treatment and thoracolumbar spinal orthosis (TLSO) brace for at least 3 months, but the intractable pain caused patients to be bedridden for prolonged periods of time and limited daily activity. As a result, the patients underwent percutaneous vertebroplasty with polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) for treatment of spinal burst fractures. RESULTS: Six male patients (mean age: 38.2) who suffered from burst fractures of vertebrae with disabling back pain refractory to analgesic therapy and TLSO brace were treated in this study. The duration of conservation treatment period was 3.5 months to 8 months (mean: 5.2 months). There was no motility. However, 4 vertebrae (66.7%), on radiographs revealed evidence of PMMA leakage through the endplate fracture site into either the disc space or the paravertebral space, without any evident clinical symptoms. No intracanal leakage was seen, and no patient needed a secondary surgical intervention. Pain decreased from 84.3 +/- 5.4 mm at baseline to 34.7 +/- 4.4 mm at the third postoperative day, 30.2 +/- 5.8 at 3 months and 24 +/- 3.5 mm at 12 months. The reduction in pain from baseline to the 3-day and 3 month mark was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The mobility was at least 2 levels of improvement (mean improvement 2.7 points) at 12-months postoperative. CONCLUSION: In highly selective patients, percutaneous vertebroplasty can be an alternative method for the treatment of spinal burst fractures and the prevention of complications from major surgical procedures. However, this procedure still has potential risks and should be employed with extreme caution to prevent extravasation of PMMA into the spinal canal.
Authors: Hak Sun Kim; Seung Yup Lee; Ankur Nanda; Ju Young Kim; Jin Oh Park; Seong Hwan Moon; Hwan Mo Lee; Ho Joong Kim; Huan Wei; Eun Su Moon Journal: Yonsei Med J Date: 2009-08-19 Impact factor: 2.759
Authors: Sami M Tarsuslugil; Rochelle M O'Hara; Nicholas J Dunne; Fraser J Buchanan; John F Orr; David C Barton; Ruth K Wilcox Journal: J Biomech Date: 2012-12-20 Impact factor: 2.712