Literature DB >> 23553291

Vertebral body stenting versus kyphoplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a randomized trial.

Clément M L Werner1, Georg Osterhoff, Jannis Schlickeiser, Raphael Jenni, Guido A Wanner, Christian Ossendorf, Hans-Peter Simmen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the treatment of vertebral compression fractures, vertebral body stenting with an expandable scaffold inserted before application of the bone cement was developed to impede secondary loss of vertebral height encountered in patients treated with balloon kyphoplasty. The purpose of this study was to clarify whether there are relevant differences between balloon kyphoplasty and vertebral body stenting with regard to perioperative and postoperative findings.
METHODS: In a two-armed randomized controlled trial, patients with a total of 100 fresh osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures were treated with either balloon kyphoplasty or vertebral body stenting. The primary outcome was the post-interventional change in the kyphotic angle on radiographs. The secondary outcomes were the maximum pressure of the balloon tamp during inflation, radiation exposure time, perioperative complications, and cement leakage.
RESULTS: The mean reduction (and standard deviation) of kyphosis (the kyphotic correction angle) was 4.5° ± 3.6° after balloon kyphoplasty and 4.7° ± 4.2° after vertebral body stenting (p = 0.972). The mean pressures were 24 ± 5 bar (348 ± 72 pounds per square inch [psi]) during vertebral body stenting and 16 ± 6 bar (233 ± 81 psi) during balloon kyphoplasty (p = 0.014). There were no significant differences in radiation exposure time.None of the patients underwent revision surgery, and postoperative neurologic sequelae were not observed. Cement leakage occurred at twenty-five of the 100 vertebral levels without significant differences between the two intervention arms (p = 0.230). Intraoperative material-related complications were observed at one of the fifty vertebral levels in the balloon kyphoplasty group and at nine of the fifty levels in the vertebral body stenting group.
CONCLUSIONS: No beneficial effect of vertebral body stenting over balloon kyphoplasty was found among patients with painful osteoporotic vertebral fractures with regard to kyphotic correction, cement leakage, radiation exposure time, or neurologic sequelae. Vertebral body stenting was associated with significantly higher pressures during balloon inflation and more material-related complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23553291     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  15 in total

1.  Safety of balloon kyphoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures in Europe: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Carmen Bouza; Teresa López-Cuadrado; Nuria Almendro; José María Amate
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Less invasive reduction and fusion of fresh A2 and A 3 traumatic L 1-L 4 fractures with a novel vertebral body augmentation implant and short pedicle screw fixation and fusion.

Authors:  Panagiotis Korovessis; Konstantinos Vardakastanis; Thomas Repantis; Vasilios Vitsas
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-10-30

3.  Is vertebral body stenting in combination with CaP cement superior to kyphoplasty?

Authors:  Sebastian Schützenberger; S M Schwarz; L Greiner; O Holub; S Grabner; W Huf; A Sailler; C Fialka
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-08-11       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Armed Kyphoplasty: An Indirect Central Canal Decompression Technique in Burst Fractures.

Authors:  A Venier; L Roccatagliata; M Isalberti; P Scarone; D E Kuhlen; M Reinert; G Bonaldi; J A Hirsch; A Cianfoni
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 5.  [Cement augmentation in spinal surgery].

Authors:  Philipp Schleicher; Alexander Wengert; Jonathan Neuhoff; Frank Kandziora
Journal:  Unfallchirurgie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-05-23

6.  Three generations of treatments for osteoporotic vertebral fractures: what is the evidence?

Authors:  Luigi Aurelio Nasto; Eugenio Jannelli; Valerio Cipolloni; Luca Piccone; Alessandro Cattolico; Alessandro Santagada; Charlotte Pripp; Alfredo Schiavone Panni; Enrico Pola
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2022-10-13

Review 7.  Third-generation percutaneous vertebral augmentation systems.

Authors:  Daniele Vanni; Renato Galzio; Anna Kazakova; Andrea Pantalone; Giovanni Grillea; Marcello Bartolo; Vincenzo Salini; Vincenzo Magliani
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-03

Review 8.  Risks and benefits of percutaneous vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty in the management of osteoporotic vertebral fractures.

Authors:  O Lamy; B Uebelhart; B Aubry-Rozier
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  Review of Vertebral Augmentation: An Updated Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness.

Authors:  Douglas Beall; Morgan P Lorio; B Min Yun; Maria J Runa; Kevin L Ong; Christopher B Warner
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-15

10.  Radiographic and safety details of vertebral body stenting: results from a multicenter chart review.

Authors:  Peter Diel; Christoph Röder; Gosia Perler; Thomas Vordemvenne; Matti Scholz; Frank Kandziora; Sebastian Fürderer; Soren Eiskjaer; Gianluca Maestretti; Robert Rotter; Lorin Michael Benneker; Paul Friedhelm Heini
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.