Literature DB >> 19214094

Prophylactic vertebroplasty may reduce the risk of adjacent intact vertebra from fatigue injury: an ex vivo biomechanical study.

Chun-Kai Chiang1, Yao-Hung Wang, Chung-Yi Yang, Been-Der Yang, Jaw-Lin Wang.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical study using human spine specimens.
OBJECTIVE: To find the biomechanical consequences of prophylactic vertebroplasty post fatigue loading. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Percutaneous vertebroplasty man be an effective treatment for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture. One frequently observed complication post surgery is the adjacent vertebral failure (AVF). The prophylactic vertebroplasty was proposed to prevent the AVF. The vertebroplasty is, nevertheless, an invasive intervention. More scientific proves are needed for the application of this surgery on a still intact vertebra.
METHODS: Fourteen 5-level fresh human cadaveric thoracic motion segments were divided into standard and prophylactic group. Both ends of the specimen were mounted, leaving the center 3 vertebrae free. The lower level of free vertebrae was artificially injured and cement augmented. The center level vertebra of standard group remained intact and nonaugmented. The center level vertebra of prophylactic group also remained intact, but augmented with bone cement. The specimen was applied with a 2-hour, 5-Hz, 630-N (mean) compressive fatigue loading. Impulse test and CT scanning were conducted both before and after fatigue loading to find the variance of strain compliance of cortical shell and height of vertebral body.
RESULTS: The strain compliance of cortical shell is generally not statistically significantly affected by the fatigue loading, cement augmentation and vertebral level (All P > 0.05). The only exception is that the cortical strain compliance of augmented vertebrae tentatively decreased post fatigue loading (P = 0.012 for tensile strain compliance, and P = 0.049 for compressive strain compliance). The height loss of intact vertebra adjacent to a 2-level augmented (or intact-augmented) vertebra is significantly lower than the one adjacent to a 1-level augmented (or injury-augmented) vertebra (P = 0.014). For an osteoporotic vertebra, neither cortical strain compliance nor vertebral height loss is connected with bone mineral density (all P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The strain compliance of cortical shell is generally not a sensitive indicator to predict risk of fatigue injury if the fatigue loading is mild. The prophylactic augmentation strengthens the osteoporotic vertebrae, decreases the progression of vertebral height loss, reduces the anterior body shift, and hence protects the adjacent intact vertebra from elevated flexion bending. It can be cautiously suggested that if the vertebra is osteoporotic and adjacent level is located at pivot or lordotic level of spinal column, the prophylactic augmentation may be an option to prevent the AVF.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19214094     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819481b1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  16 in total

Review 1.  [Vertebroplasty: an update: value of percutaneous cement augmentation after randomized, placebo-controlled trials].

Authors:  P F Heini
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Preventive vertebroplasty for adjacent vertebral bodies: a good solution to reduce adjacent vertebral fracture after percutaneous vertebroplasty.

Authors:  C H Yen; M M H Teng; W H Yuan; Y C Sun; C Y Chang
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Biomechanical evaluation of an interfacet joint decompression and stabilization system.

Authors:  Jeremi M Leasure; Jenni Buckley
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.097

4.  Answer to the Letter to the Editor of Ming Yang et al. concerning "Risk factors of new symptomatic vertebral compression fractures in osteoporotic patients undergone percutaneous vertebroplasty" by Ren HL et al. (2015) Eur Spine J;24(4):750-758.

Authors:  Hai-Long Ren
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Multilevel Contiguous Osteoporotic Lumbar Compression Fractures: The Relationship of Scoliosis to the Development of Cascading Fractures.

Authors:  Alex Sabo; Jesse Hatgis; Michelle Granville; Robert E Jacobson
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-12-19

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

Authors:  Tobias L Schulte; Alexander Keiler; Felix Riechelmann; Tobias Lange; Werner Schmoelz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Refracture of osteoporotic vertebral body concurrent with cement fragmentation at the previously treated vertebral level after balloon kyphoplasty: a case report.

Authors:  Xigong Li; Xianfeng Lou; Xiangjin Lin; Junhua Du
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Comparison of kyphoplasty and lordoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture.

Authors:  Sang-Bum Kim; Taek-Soo Jeon; Woo-Suk Lee; Jae-Young Roh; Jae-Young Kim; Won-Ki Park
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2010-11-24

9.  Vertebroplasty for pain relief and spinal stabilization in multiple myeloma.

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

Review 10.  Does prophylactic vertebral augmentation reduce the refracture rate in osteoporotic vertebral fracture patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Zhi Chen; Chenyang Song; Hailin Lin; Jun Sun; Wenge Liu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.