Wenwu Zhang1, Shenpeng Liu2, Xianhua Liu3, Xiang Li1, Le Wang4, Yong Wan5. 1. Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, No. 58, Zhongshan 2nd Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, China. 2. Department of Orthopedic, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, No. 88, Jiankang Road, Weihui, 453100, Henan, China. 3. Department of Psychiatry, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, No. 388, Jianshe Road, Xinxiang, 453002, Henan, China. 4. Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, No. 58, Zhongshan 2nd Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, China. wangle3@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 5. Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, No. 58, Zhongshan 2nd Road, Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong, China. wanyong@mail.sysu.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is a routine operation for the treatment of osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures (OLCFs). As is well known, unilateral puncture is a common method. However, with the conventional transpedicular approach (CTPA), the cement may be asymmetrically dispersed, so some surgeons use the transverse process root-pedicle approach (TPRPA). The objective of this study was to compare the clinical results and bone cement distribution of PVP for OLCF with unilateral TPRPA and CTPA to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the two surgical options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2016 to June 2019, seventy-two elderly patients who underwent unilateral PVP for single-level OLCF were retrospectively reviewed. Operation time, injection amount and type of bone cement distribution, and bone cement leakage and surgical complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were used to evaluate the clinical results. All patients were followed up for more than 12 months, and the assessment was based primarily on clinical and radiological outcomes. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the surgical time and the volume and the type of bone cement distribution and the lost of operative vertebra height between the two groups. However, there was no significant difference in bone cement leakage. Moreover, there were no significant differences in VAS and ODI between the two groups at 2 days and 12 months after the operation. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral TPRPA and CTPA are practical and feasible methods in PVP for the treatment of OLCF, and they have similar clinical effects. However, TPRPA has the advantages of a better distribution of bone cement and a shorter operation time and a better maintenance effect of injured vertebra height, without increasing the rate of bone cement leakage.
PURPOSE: Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) is a routine operation for the treatment of osteoporotic lumbar compression fractures (OLCFs). As is well known, unilateral puncture is a common method. However, with the conventional transpedicular approach (CTPA), the cement may be asymmetrically dispersed, so some surgeons use the transverse process root-pedicle approach (TPRPA). The objective of this study was to compare the clinical results and bone cement distribution of PVP for OLCF with unilateral TPRPA and CTPA to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the two surgical options. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 2016 to June 2019, seventy-two elderly patients who underwent unilateral PVP for single-level OLCF were retrospectively reviewed. Operation time, injection amount and type of bone cement distribution, and bone cement leakage and surgical complications were recorded. The visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were used to evaluate the clinical results. All patients were followed up for more than 12 months, and the assessment was based primarily on clinical and radiological outcomes. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the surgical time and the volume and the type of bone cement distribution and the lost of operative vertebra height between the two groups. However, there was no significant difference in bone cement leakage. Moreover, there were no significant differences in VAS and ODI between the two groups at 2 days and 12 months after the operation. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral TPRPA and CTPA are practical and feasible methods in PVP for the treatment of OLCF, and they have similar clinical effects. However, TPRPA has the advantages of a better distribution of bone cement and a shorter operation time and a better maintenance effect of injured vertebra height, without increasing the rate of bone cement leakage.