PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of cement injection under vacuum aspiration (CIVAS) of cleft contents in percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with an intravertebral cleft. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2008 to October 2010, vertebroplasty for single-level osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with clefts was performed in 34 patients (seven women, 27 men; mean age, 77 y) with CIVAS and in 41 patients (three women, 38 men; mean age, 77 y) by conventional injection (control group). In this retrospective study, the cement volume, cement ratio, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and incidences of leakage, new vertebral compression fracture, and nonhealing were compared between groups. Vertebral height changes in the CIVAS group were also evaluated. RESULTS: There were significant decreases in VAS scores in both groups (P < .001). There were no significant differences in complications between groups (cement leakage, P = .70; new vertebral compression fracture, P = .17; nonhealing, P = .086). Vertebral height was significantly decreased by vacuum aspiration and increased by cement injection (P < .001). The mean cement volume was significantly higher (P = .0057) in the CIVAS group (4.87 mL) than in the control group (3.58 mL). Cement filling was achieved more sufficiently in the CIVAS group (P = .014). CONCLUSIONS: The CIVAS method is feasible and appears to improve cleft filling in the treatment of single-level vertebral compression fractures with a cleft, compared with conventional cement injection.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of cement injection under vacuum aspiration (CIVAS) of cleft contents in percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with an intravertebral cleft. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2008 to October 2010, vertebroplasty for single-level osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures with clefts was performed in 34 patients (seven women, 27 men; mean age, 77 y) with CIVAS and in 41 patients (three women, 38 men; mean age, 77 y) by conventional injection (control group). In this retrospective study, the cement volume, cement ratio, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and incidences of leakage, new vertebral compression fracture, and nonhealing were compared between groups. Vertebral height changes in the CIVAS group were also evaluated. RESULTS: There were significant decreases in VAS scores in both groups (P < .001). There were no significant differences in complications between groups (cement leakage, P = .70; new vertebral compression fracture, P = .17; nonhealing, P = .086). Vertebral height was significantly decreased by vacuum aspiration and increased by cement injection (P < .001). The mean cement volume was significantly higher (P = .0057) in the CIVAS group (4.87 mL) than in the control group (3.58 mL). Cement filling was achieved more sufficiently in the CIVAS group (P = .014). CONCLUSIONS: The CIVAS method is feasible and appears to improve cleft filling in the treatment of single-level vertebral compression fractures with a cleft, compared with conventional cement injection.