Ming-Min Shi1, Xun-Zi Cai, Tiao Lin, Wei Wang, Shi-Gui Yan. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, No.88 Jiefang Road, Hangzhou, 310009, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteoporotic vertebral compressed fractures (VCFs) are the most common osteoporotic fractures. Although percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) reportedly relieves pain and improves function, a recent pooled analysis from two multicenter randomized controlled trials concluded the improvement in pain and disability treated with PVP was similar to those with sham surgery. QUESTIONS/ PURPOSE: Using meta-analysis we therefore asked whether compared with either nonoperative therapy or a sham injection for patients with VCF, PVP would (1) better relieve pain, (2) provide greater improvement in pain-related disability, and (3) increase the recurrence of vertebral fractures. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane library using the keywords "vertebroplasty AND osteoporosis OR fracture". We included nine of the 469 articles identified. Using a random effects model, we calculated the weighted mean differences to evaluate the pain reduction at different times as the primary outcome. Pain-related disability was assessed by a quality of life (QOL) measure. Improvement of QOL and recurrence of vertebral fractures were the secondary outcomes. We used subgroup analysis to reinvestigate pain relief and function improvement of PVP based on two different controls: nonoperative therapy and sham injection. The total number of patients was 886. RESULTS: Pain scoring was similar between the PVP group and the sham injection group at 1 to 29 days and 90 days. However, compared with nonoperative therapy, PVP reduced pain at all times studied. QOL in the PVP group was improved or tended to be improved compared with QOL for both control groups. The risk of new fractures was similar between the PVP groups and both control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Different control groups may have accounted for the different conclusions in the literature regarding the ability of PVP to relieve pain and restore function recovery. Compared with nonoperative treatment PVP relieved pain better and improved QOL. PVP did not increase the risk of new fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
BACKGROUND:Osteoporotic vertebral compressed fractures (VCFs) are the most common osteoporotic fractures. Although percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) reportedly relieves pain and improves function, a recent pooled analysis from two multicenter randomized controlled trials concluded the improvement in pain and disability treated with PVP was similar to those with sham surgery. QUESTIONS/ PURPOSE: Using meta-analysis we therefore asked whether compared with either nonoperative therapy or a sham injection for patients with VCF, PVP would (1) better relieve pain, (2) provide greater improvement in pain-related disability, and (3) increase the recurrence of vertebral fractures. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane library using the keywords "vertebroplasty AND osteoporosis OR fracture". We included nine of the 469 articles identified. Using a random effects model, we calculated the weighted mean differences to evaluate the pain reduction at different times as the primary outcome. Pain-related disability was assessed by a quality of life (QOL) measure. Improvement of QOL and recurrence of vertebral fractures were the secondary outcomes. We used subgroup analysis to reinvestigate pain relief and function improvement of PVP based on two different controls: nonoperative therapy and sham injection. The total number of patients was 886. RESULTS:Pain scoring was similar between the PVP group and the sham injection group at 1 to 29 days and 90 days. However, compared with nonoperative therapy, PVP reduced pain at all times studied. QOL in the PVP group was improved or tended to be improved compared with QOL for both control groups. The risk of new fractures was similar between the PVP groups and both control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Different control groups may have accounted for the different conclusions in the literature regarding the ability of PVP to relieve pain and restore function recovery. Compared with nonoperative treatment PVP relieved pain better and improved QOL. PVP did not increase the risk of new fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: D P Beall; W P McRoberts; S H Berven; J T Ledlie; S M Tutton; B P Parsons Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: F Borgström; D P Beall; S Berven; S Boonen; S Christie; D F Kallmes; J A Kanis; G Olafsson; A J Singer; K Åkesson Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2014-11-08 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: S L Han; S L Wan; Q T Li; D T Xu; H M Zang; N J Chen; L Y Chen; W P Zhang; C Luan; F Yang; Z W Xu Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2014-08-23 Impact factor: 4.507