Jiann-Her Lin1, Sheng-Hao Wang2, En-Yuan Lin2, Yung-Hsiao Chiang3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan; Ph.D. Program for Neural Regenerative Medicine, College of Medical Science and Technology, Taipei Medical University and National Health Research Institutes, Taipei, Taiwan; Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan; Ph.D. Program for Neural Regenerative Medicine, College of Medical Science and Technology, Taipei Medical University and National Health Research Institutes, Taipei, Taiwan; Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan. Electronic address: jiannherlin@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study compared the radiologic and clinical outcomes of kyphoplasty with intravertebral reduction device (IRD) and vertebroplasty (VP) in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 75 patients with OVCFs who were aged >60 years and treated them through VP or kyphoplasty with IRD. The radiologic outcomes, namely the anterior and middle body heights (ABH and MBH, respectively) and kyphotic angle (KA), were measured preoperatively and at postoperative 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. The refracture was identified on the basis of a decrease in ABH, MBH, or KA compared with those at postoperative 1 week. Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and complications were recorded. The incidence of adjacent and nonadjacent fractures was also recorded. RESULTS: We treated 36 patients with kyphoplasty with IRD (IRD group) and 39 through VP (VP group). The patient characteristics were comparable in both groups. The KA and its restoration were more favorable after IRD than after VP. Although ABHs were not different in either group, their restoration was more efficient after IRD than after VP. MBHs, their restoration, and their refracture rates were better after IRD than after VP. VAS pain scores and complication rates were not different between the groups. The incidences of adjacent or nonadjacent fractures were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal significantly more efficient height restoration and kyphosis correction and fewer refractures in the IRD group. IRD may not increase the risk of adjacent or nonadjacent fractures.
PURPOSE: This study compared the radiologic and clinical outcomes of kyphoplasty with intravertebral reduction device (IRD) and vertebroplasty (VP) in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 75 patients with OVCFs who were aged >60 years and treated them through VP or kyphoplasty with IRD. The radiologic outcomes, namely the anterior and middle body heights (ABH and MBH, respectively) and kyphotic angle (KA), were measured preoperatively and at postoperative 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. The refracture was identified on the basis of a decrease in ABH, MBH, or KA compared with those at postoperative 1 week. Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and complications were recorded. The incidence of adjacent and nonadjacent fractures was also recorded. RESULTS: We treated 36 patients with kyphoplasty with IRD (IRD group) and 39 through VP (VP group). The patient characteristics were comparable in both groups. The KA and its restoration were more favorable after IRD than after VP. Although ABHs were not different in either group, their restoration was more efficient after IRD than after VP. MBHs, their restoration, and their refracture rates were better after IRD than after VP. VAS pain scores and complication rates were not different between the groups. The incidences of adjacent or nonadjacent fractures were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings reveal significantly more efficient height restoration and kyphosis correction and fewer refractures in the IRD group. IRD may not increase the risk of adjacent or nonadjacent fractures.