INTRODUCTION: Spinal involvement is a common presentation of multiple myeloma (MM); however, the cervical spine is the least common site of myelomatous involvement. Few studies evaluate the results of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) in the treatment of MM of the spine. The purpose of this series is to report on the use of PV in the treatment of MM of the cervical spine and to review the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1994 to October 2007, four patients (three men and one woman; mean age, 45 years) who underwent five PV for painful MM in the cervical spine were retrospectively reviewed. The pain was estimated by the patient on a verbal analogic scale. Clinical follow-up was available for all patients (mean, 27.5 months; range, 1-96 months). RESULTS: The mean volume of cement injected per vertebral body was 2.3 +/- 0.8 mL (range, 1.0-4.0 mL) with a mean vertebral filling of 55.0 +/- 12.0% (range, 40.0-75.0%). Analgesic efficacy was achieved in all patients. One patient had a spinal instability due to a progression of spinal deformity noted on follow-up radiographs, without clinical symptoms. Cement leakage was detected in three (60%) of the five treated vertebrae. There was no clinical complication. CONCLUSIONS: The present series suggests that PV for MM of the cervical spine is safe and effective for pain control; nonetheless, the detrimental impact of the disease on bone quality should prompt close radiological follow-up after PV owing to the risk of spinal instability.
INTRODUCTION: Spinal involvement is a common presentation of multiple myeloma (MM); however, the cervical spine is the least common site of myelomatous involvement. Few studies evaluate the results of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PV) in the treatment of MM of the spine. The purpose of this series is to report on the use of PV in the treatment of MM of the cervical spine and to review the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1994 to October 2007, four patients (three men and one woman; mean age, 45 years) who underwent five PV for painful MM in the cervical spine were retrospectively reviewed. The pain was estimated by the patient on a verbal analogic scale. Clinical follow-up was available for all patients (mean, 27.5 months; range, 1-96 months). RESULTS: The mean volume of cement injected per vertebral body was 2.3 +/- 0.8 mL (range, 1.0-4.0 mL) with a mean vertebral filling of 55.0 +/- 12.0% (range, 40.0-75.0%). Analgesic efficacy was achieved in all patients. One patient had a spinal instability due to a progression of spinal deformity noted on follow-up radiographs, without clinical symptoms. Cement leakage was detected in three (60%) of the five treated vertebrae. There was no clinical complication. CONCLUSIONS: The present series suggests that PV for MM of the cervical spine is safe and effective for pain control; nonetheless, the detrimental impact of the disease on bone quality should prompt close radiological follow-up after PV owing to the risk of spinal instability.
Authors: Bernd Wegener; Peter Ernst Müller; Volkmar Jansson; Andreas Krödel; Gideon Heinert; Hans Roland Dürr Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-09-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: R J McDonald; A T Trout; L A Gray; A Dispenzieri; K R Thielen; D F Kallmes Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-01-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A Cotten; F Dewatre; B Cortet; R Assaker; D Leblond; B Duquesnoy; P Chastanet; J Clarisse Journal: Radiology Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Flavio Tancioni; Martin Lorenzetti; Pierina Navarria; Andrea Nozza; Luca Castagna; Paolo Gaetani; Enrico Aimar; Daniel Levi; Antonio Di Ieva; Patrizia Pisano; Armando Santoro; Marta Scorsetti; Riccardo Rodriguez y Baena Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Allan Lipton; Robert Uzzo; Robert J Amato; Georgiana K Ellis; Behrooz Hakimian; G David Roodman; Matthew R Smith Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Kazimierz Kordecki; Andrzej Lewszuk; Magdalena Puławska-Stalmach; Paweł Michalak; Adam Łukasiewicz; Izabela Sackiewicz; Piotr Polaków; Katarzyna Rutka; Wojciech Łebkowski; Urszula Łebkowska Journal: Pol J Radiol Date: 2015-01-28