BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether vertebral augmentation technology increases the occurrence of adjacent vertebral fractures in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library, were retrieved via PRISMA covering 1987 to 2015. The number of patients who suffered from adjacent secondary vertebral fractures was calculated. A meta-analysis, using indexes of odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), was conducted with STATA software. Subgroup investigations were conducted according to the operation methods and the duration of observation. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were also evaluated. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met our inclusion criteria. Our results indicated there was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence rate of adjacent vertebral fractures between manipulation of vertebral augmentation and non-surgical treatment (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.58-1.37). Neither subgroup investigations based on selection of operation nor duration of follow-up time showed marked differences. A sensitivity analysis did not identify specific trails seriously deflected. No obvious publication bias was identified. CONCLUSION: Despite various limitations in the present study, our data demonstrated that using vertebral augmentation was not related to increasing incidence of subsequent adjacent vertebral fractures.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether vertebral augmentation technology increases the occurrence of adjacent vertebral fractures in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library, were retrieved via PRISMA covering 1987 to 2015. The number of patients who suffered from adjacent secondary vertebral fractures was calculated. A meta-analysis, using indexes of odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), was conducted with STATA software. Subgroup investigations were conducted according to the operation methods and the duration of observation. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were also evaluated. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met our inclusion criteria. Our results indicated there was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence rate of adjacent vertebral fractures between manipulation of vertebral augmentation and non-surgical treatment (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.58-1.37). Neither subgroup investigations based on selection of operation nor duration of follow-up time showed marked differences. A sensitivity analysis did not identify specific trails seriously deflected. No obvious publication bias was identified. CONCLUSION: Despite various limitations in the present study, our data demonstrated that using vertebral augmentation was not related to increasing incidence of subsequent adjacent vertebral fractures.