| Literature DB >> 26757891 |
Kenji Takahara1, Mikio Kamimura2, Hideki Moriya1, Ryohei Ashizawa1, Tsuyoshi Koike1, Yohei Hidai1, Shota Ikegami3, Yukio Nakamura4, Hiroyuki Kato3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recently percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) was frequently performed for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral fractures (VFs). It is widely accepted that new compression fractures tend to occur adjacent to the vertebral bodies, typically within a month after PVP. To determine the risk factors among several potential predictors for de novo VFs following PVP in patients with osteoporosis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26757891 PMCID: PMC4711009 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-0887-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fracture and adjacent fracture levels
| Fracture level | N | Adjacent new fracture n (%) | Level (n) |
|---|---|---|---|
| T11 | 14 | 5 (35.8 %) | T10 (3), T12 (2) |
| T12 | 23 | 5 (21.7 %) | T11 (4), L1 (1) |
| L1 | 16 | 3 (18.8 %) | T12 (3) |
| L2 | 7 | 1 (14.3 %) | L1 (1) |
| L4 | 1 |
Mean VAS pain scores in the non-collapse and collapse groupsᅟ
| Non-collapse group ( | Collapse group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | 9.7 ± 0.5 | 9.6 ± 0.8 |
|
| After 1 day | 1.5 ± 0.7* | 1.8 ± 1.0* |
|
| After 1 month | 2.5 ± 1.0* | 6.8 ± 1.2* |
|
| Final follow-up | 2.6 ± 1.2* | 3.3 ± 0.8* |
|
Parameters were compared between the 2 groups using the Student’s t-test
*Significant difference. Compared with pre-operative VAS scores
Patient characteristics and overall findings in the non-collapse and collapse groups
| Non-collapse group | Collapse group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Height (cm) | 144.5 ± 3.8 | 142.6 ± 3.0 | 0.066 |
| Weight (kg) | 43.9 ± 5.4 | 42.0 ± 3.7 | 0.150 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.0 ± 2.1 | 20.6 ± 1.5 | 0.497 |
| Age (years) | 77.0 ± 7.5 | 85.2 ± 5.8 | <0.001* |
| BAP (U/L) | 38.7 ± 16.3 | 35.1 ± 11.1 | 0.356 |
| NTX (nmol BCE/mmol Cr) | 60.8 ± 20.9 | 72.1 ± 15.6 | 0.036* |
| L2–4 BMD (g/cm2) | 0.776 ± 0.101 | 0.620 ± 0.084 | <0.001* |
| Total BMD (g/cm2) | 0.814 ± 0.079 | 0.699 ± 0.103 | 0.001* |
| Neck BMD (g/cm2) | 0.759 ± 0.086 | 0.618 ± 0.103 | <0.001* |
| Troch BMD (g/cm2) | 0.714 ± 0.096 | 0.574 ± 0.090 | <0.001* |
*Significant difference
Odds ratio and 95 % CI for risk of adjacent vertebral fracture
| Risk factor | Odds ratio | 95 % CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| −1SD of BMI | 1.2 | 0.6–2.3 | 0.562 |
| +1SD of age | 4.5 | 1.9–13.0 | 0.001 |
| +1SD of NTX | 1.9 | 0.9–4.1 | 0.073 |
| +1SD of BAP | 0.7 | 0.3–1.4 | 0.442 |
| −1SD of L2–4 BMD | 8.2 | 2.9–34.4 | <0.001 |
| −1SD of total BMD | 4.5 | 2.0–13.3 | 0.001 |
| −1SD of neck BMD | 7.2 | 2.6–28.8 | <0.001 |
| −1SD of troch BMD | 9.6 | 3.0–51.2 | 0.001 |
Abbreviations: SD standard deviation, CI confidence intervals
Sensitivity, specificity, and cut-off values of factors predictive of adjacent vertebral fracture
| Parameter | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | LR+ | LR- |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||||
| ≥75 | 100 | 30 | 1.42 | 0.00 |
| ≥ 80 | 79 | 70 | 2.63 | 0.30 |
| ≥ 85 | 57 | 83 | 3.35 | 0.51 |
| 85 and over | 21 | 96 | 5.03 | 0.82 |
| L2–4 BMD (g/cm2) | ||||
| < 0.600 [−3.5SD] | 29 | 94 | 4.47 | 0.76 |
| < 0.700 [−2.6SD] | 86 | 83 | 5.03 | 0.17 |
| < 0.800 [−1.8SD] | 100 | 34 | 1.51 | 0.00 |
| < 0.900 [−0.9SD] | 100 | 11 | 1.11 | 0.00 |
| Total BMD (g/cm2) | ||||
| < 0.600 [−2.8SD] | 29 | 100 | ∞ | 0.71 |
| < 0.700 [−1.8SD] | 43 | 98 | 20.1 | 0.58 |
| < 0.800 [−0.8SD] | 93 | 53 | 1.98 | 0.13 |
| < 0.900 [+0.3SD] | 100 | 9 | 1.09 | 0.00 |
| Neck BMD (g/cm2) | ||||
| < 0.600 [−2.1SD] | 36 | 98 | 16.78 | 0.65 |
| < 0.700 [−1.0SD] | 71 | 74 | 2.79 | 0.38 |
| < 0.800 [+0.1SD] | 100 | 28 | 1.38 | 0.00 |
| < 0.900 [+1.2SD] | 100 | 6 | 1.06 | 0.00 |
| Troch BMD (g/cm2) | ||||
| <0.600 [-] | 50 | 96 | 11.75 | 0.52 |
| <0.700 [-] | 100 | 51 | 2.04 | 0.00 |
| <0.800 [-] | 100 | 21 | 1.27 | 0.00 |
| <0.900 [-] | 100 | 4 | 1.04 | 0.00 |
Abbreviations: BMD bone mineral density, LR+ positive likelihood ratio, LR- negative likelihood ratio. SD values were calculated according to the Japanese Orthopaedic Diagnostic Guidelines using cut-off values based on Japanese patients. The SD of trochanteric BMD could not be calculated since there are no established values in Japan
∞: infinity