Literature DB >> 21333599

Balloon kyphoplasty versus non-surgical fracture management for treatment of painful vertebral body compression fractures in patients with cancer: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

James Berenson1, Robert Pflugmacher, Peter Jarzem, Jeffrey Zonder, Kenneth Schechtman, John B Tillman, Leonard Bastian, Talat Ashraf, Frank Vrionis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Non-randomised trials have reported benefits of kyphoplasty in patients with cancer and vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of balloon kyphoplasty compared with non-surgical management for patients with cancer who have painful VCFs.
METHODS: The Cancer Patient Fracture Evaluation (CAFE) study was a randomised controlled trial at 22 sites in Europe, the USA, Canada, and Australia. We enrolled patients aged at least 21 years who had cancer and one to three painful VCFs. Patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated minimisation randomisation algorithm to kyphoplasty or non-surgical management (control group). Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was back-specific functional status measured by the Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (RDQ) score at 1 month. Outcomes at 1 month were analysed by modified intention to treat, including all patients with data available at baseline and at 1 month follow-up. Patients in the control group were allowed to crossover to receive kyphoplasty after 1 month. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00211237.
FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2005, and March 11, 2008, 134 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to kyphoplasty (n=70) or non-surgical management (n=64). 65 patients in the kyphoplasty group and 52 in the control group had data available at 1 month. The mean RDQ score in the kyphoplasty group changed from 17·6 at baseline to 9·1 at 1 month (mean change -8·3 points, 95% CI -6·4 to -10·2; p<0·0001). The mean score in the control group changed from 18·2 to 18·0 (mean change 0·1 points; 95% CI -0·8 to 1·0; p=0·83). At 1 month, the kyphoplasty treatment effect for RDQ was -8·4 points (95% CI -7·6 to -9·2; p<0·0001). The most common adverse events within the first month were back pain (four of 70 in the kyphoplasty group and five of 64 in the control group) and symptomatic vertebral fracture (two and three, respectively). One patient in the kyphoplasty group had an intraoperative non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, which resolved and was attributed to anaesthesia. Another patient in this group had a new VCF, which was thought to be device related.
INTERPRETATION: For painful VCFs in patients with cancer, kyphoplasty is an effective and safe treatment that rapidly reduces pain and improves function. FUNDING: Medtronic Spine LLC.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21333599     DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70008-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Oncol        ISSN: 1470-2045            Impact factor:   41.316


  106 in total

1.  Orthopaedics: Structural support.

Authors:  Jennifer Berglund
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European spine journal review: a survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European spine journal, 2015.

Authors:  Robert C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Kyphoplasty and intra-operative radiotheray, combination of kyphoplasty and intra-operative radiation for spinal metastases: technical feasibility of a novel approach.

Authors:  René Schmidt; Frederik Wenz; Tina Reis; Karolin Janik; Frederic Bludau; Udo Obertacke
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-01-22       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Utility of Cement Augmentation via Percutaneous Fenestrated Pedicle Screws for Stabilization of Cancer-Related Spinal Instability.

Authors:  Ori Barzilai; Lily McLaughlin; Eric Lis; Anne S Reiner; Mark H Bilsky; Ilya Laufer
Journal:  Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 2.703

5.  Can Internet information on vertebroplasty be a reliable means of patient self-education?

Authors:  T Barrett Sullivan; Joshua T Anderson; Uri M Ahn; Nicholas U Ahn
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Patient-reported outcomes after surgical stabilization of spinal tumors: symptom-based validation of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) and surgery.

Authors:  Ibrahim Hussain; Ori Barzilai; Anne S Reiner; Natalie DiStefano; Lily McLaughlin; Shahiba Ogilvie; Mark Bilsky; Ilya Laufer
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  [Kyphoplasty in combination with intraoperative radiotherapy. Technical and regulatory characteristics of a concept for treatment of vertebral metastases].

Authors:  R Kayser; S A Ender; E Asse; E Wilhelm; F Adler; R Schmidt; F Wenz; U Obertacke; F Bludau
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 8.  Percutaneous Management of Cancer Pain.

Authors:  Dimitrios K Filippiadis; Lambros Tselikas; Alberto Bazzocchi; Evegnia Efthymiou; Alexis Kelekis; Steven Yevich
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2020-04-16       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 9.  Myeloma and Bone Disease.

Authors:  Cristina Panaroni; Andrew J Yee; Noopur S Raje
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 5.096

Review 10.  Percutaneous Minimally Invasive Techniques in the Treatment of Spinal Metastases.

Authors:  Mara Bozza Stephenson; Bryan Glaenzer; Angelo Malamis
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2016-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.