经皮椎体成形术和经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折

目的:观察经皮椎体成形术(percutaneous vertebroplasty,PVP)和经皮椎体后凸成形术(percutanous kyphoplasty,PKP)治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的疗效。方法:2007年10月～2009年4月收治骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折患者106例,其中61例82个椎体接受PVP治疗,男21例29个椎体,女40例53个椎体,年龄65～96岁,平均78.3岁;45例55个椎体接受PKP治疗,男17例21个椎体,女28例34个椎体,年龄68～90岁,平均77.1岁。术前及术后1d进行疼痛视觉类比评分(VAS),测量伤椎高度,随访伤椎高度丢失情况,记录骨水泥渗漏及随访期间邻近椎体骨折情况。结果:PVP组术前和术后1d VAS分别为6.7±1.4分和2.1±0.7分,PKP组分别为6.9±1.2分和2.2±0.9分,每组术后VAS与术前比较有统计学差异(P<0.05),同时间点组间比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。PVP组55例、PKP组41例获得随访,随访时间为12～36个月,平均18个月。PVP组和PKP组术后伤椎高度分别较术前增加2.4±1.8mm和9.2±2.2mm,术后12个月随访伤椎高度分别丢失0.8±0.5mm和1.9±0.8mm,两组比较有统计学差异(P<0.05)。PVP组术中骨水泥渗漏28例33个椎体,PKP组15例17个椎体,PKP组骨水泥渗漏率明显低于PVP组(P<0.05)。随访期间PVP组发生相邻椎体骨折9例,PKP组6例,两组相邻椎体骨折发生率无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论:PVP和PKP治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的止痛效果均较好;PKP的复位效果优于PVP,较少发生骨水泥渗漏,但术后椎体高度再次丢失较明显;两者术后相邻椎体骨折发生率无明显差异。     

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

Vertebral fracture (VF) is the most common osteoporotic fracture and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Conservative treatment combining antalgic agents and rest is usually recommended for symptomatic VFs. The aim of this paper is to review the randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy and safety of percutaneous vertebroplasty (VP) and percutaneous balloon kyphoplasty (KP) versus conservative treatment. VP and KP procedures are associated with an acceptable general safety. Although the case series investigating VP/KP have all shown an outstanding analgesic benefit, randomized controlled studies are rare and have yielded contradictory results. In several of these studies, a short-term analgesic benefit was observed, except in the prospective randomized sham-controlled studies. A long-term analgesic and functional benefit has rarely been noted. Several recent studies have shown that both VP and KP are associated with an increased risk of new VFs. These fractures are mostly VFs adjacent to the procedure, and they occur within a shorter time period than VFs in other locations. The main risk factors include the number of preexisting VFs, the number of VPs/KPs performed, age, decreased bone mineral density, and intradiscal cement leakage. It is therefore important to involve the patients to whom VP/KP is being proposed in the decision-making process. It is also essential to rapidly initiate a specific osteoporosis therapy when a VF occurs (ideally a bone anabolic treatment) so as to reduce the risk of fracture. Randomized controlled studies are necessary in order to better define the profile of patients who likely benefit the most from VP/KP.     

Spinal loads after osteoporotic vertebral fractures treated by vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty

Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are routine treatments for compression fractures of vertebral bodies. A wedge-shaped compression fracture shifts the centre of gravity of the upper body anteriorly and generally, this shift can be compensated in the spine and in the hips. However, it is still unclear how a wedge-shaped compression fracture of a vertebra increases forces in the trunk muscle and the intradiscal pressure in the adjacent discs. A nonlinear finite element model of the lumbar spine was used to estimate the force in the trunk muscle, the intradiscal pressure and the stresses in the endplates in the intact spine, and after vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty treatment. In this study, kyphoplasty represents a treatment with nearly full fracture reduction and vertebroplasty one without restoration of kyphotic angle although in reality kyphoplasty does not guarantee fracture reduction. If no compensation of upper body shift is assumed, the force in the erector spine increases by about 200% for the vertebroplasty but by only 55% for the kyphoplasty compared to the intact spine. Intradiscal pressure increases by about 60 and 20% for the vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, respectively. In contrast, with shift compensation of the upper body, the increase in muscle force is much lower and increase in intradiscal pressure is only about 20 and 7.5% for the vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, respectively. Augmentation of the vertebral body with bone cement has a much smaller effect on intradiscal pressure. The increase in that case is only about 2.4% for the intact as well as for the fractured vertebra. Moreover, the effect of upper body shift after a wedge-shaped vertebral body fracture on intradiscal pressure and thus on spinal load is much more pronounced than that of stiffness increase due to cement infiltration. Maximum von Mises stress in the endplates of all lumbar vertebrae is also higher after kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty. Cement augmentation has only a minor effect on endplate stresses in the unfractured vertebrae. The advantages of kyphoplasty found in this study will be apparent only if nearly full fracture reduction is achieved. Otherwise, differences between kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty become small or vanish. Our results suggest that vertebral body fractures in the adjacent vertebrae after vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty are not induced by the elevated stiffness of the treated vertebra, but instead the anterior shift of the upper body is the dominating factor.     

PVP与PKP治疗骨质疏松性骨折止痛效果分析

目的 探讨PVP与PKP技术治疗骨质疏松性骨折止痛效果有无差异.方法 35例(41个椎体)骨质疏松性骨折进行PVP治疗;39例(47个椎体)骨质疏松性骨折进行PKP治疗.术前、术后3 d、1月、3月应用10分制视觉模拟评分(VAS)对患者疼痛进行评价.结果 PVP组术前与术后各时间段比较,均有统计学差异,但术后各时间段无统计学差异;PKP组也得到同样结果.而两组间各时间段进行比较,差异均无显著性.结论 PVP与PKP治疗骨质疏松性骨折均有迅速、明确的止痛作用,但二者间无差异.     

Balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty in the management of vertebral compression fractures

Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) are the most prevalent fractures in osteoporotic patients. The classical conservative management of these fractures is through rest, pain medication, bracing and muscle relaxants. The aim of this paper is to review prospective controlled studies comparing the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive techniques for vertebral augmentation, vertebroplasty (VP) and balloon kyphoplasty (BKP), versus non-surgical management (NSM). The Fracture Working Group of the International Osteoporosis Foundation conducted a literature search and developed a review paper on VP and BKP. The results presented for the direct management of osteoporotic VCFs focused on clinical outcomes of these three different procedures, including reduction in pain, improvement of function and mobility, vertebral height restoration and decrease in spinal curvature (kyphosis). Overall, VP and BKP are generally safe procedures that provide quicker pain relief, mobility recovery and in some cases vertebral height restoration than conventional conservative medical treatment, at least in the short term. However, the long-term benefits and safety in terms of risk of subsequent vertebral fractures have not been clearly demonstrated and further prospective randomized studies are needed with standards for reporting. Referral physicians should be aware of VP/BKP and their potential to reduce the health impairment of patients with VCFs. However, VP and BKP are not substitutes for appropriate evaluation and treatment of osteoporosis to reduce the risk of future fractures.     

Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty for the management of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures

Osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures have previously been treated nonoperatively given the tremendous morbidity associated with open fixation in elderly patients who often have multiple medical comorbidities. With the advent of percutaneous vertebral augmentation techniques, these fractures can now be stabilized using minimally invasive surgical techniques while maintaining a relatively safe risk profile. Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty provide immediate pain relief in the great majority of patients who have painful, osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures. The balloon used in kyphoplasty may allow for improved height restoration, cavity creation, and decreased cement extravasation rates. The authors discuss the procedural steps, advantages and disadvantages, and results of each technique, recognizing that prospective, randomized controlled studies are necessary to objectively compare the two techniques.     

椎体成形术和球囊后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折应注意的问题

骨质疏松是老年人常见的一种疾病,随着人口老龄化趋势,骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折(osteoporotic ver-tebral compression fractures,OVCFs)发病率增高,对于疼痛症状明显的OVCFs行保守治疗的效果不甚满意,因卧床时间较长,易发生褥疮、肺部感染以及深静脉血栓等并发症,严重影响生活质...     

骨质疏松性椎体骨折PVP/PKP术后新发骨折的相关因素

骨质疏松性椎体骨折(osteoporotic vertebral compression,OVCF)为临床上常见疾病,目前关于OVCF的治疗有保守治疗、椎体成形术(percutaneous vertebroplasty,PVP)、椎体后凸成形术(percutaneons kyphoplasty,PKP)等。但经治疗后患者出现其他椎体骨折的发生率较高,且引起的的原因目前颇有争议。作者根据近年来国内外报道的关于OVCF行PVP或PKP术后新发椎体骨折的流行病学特点、原因等做一综述,为临床治疗提供一定的参考。     

Comparative study of percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures

Objective  

To compare the therapeutic effect of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) and percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) in the treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (VCFs).     

椎体成形术与后凸成形术治疗老年陈旧性骨质疏松椎体压缩性骨折的相关问题探讨

目的:探讨椎体成形术(PVP)与后凸成形术(PKP)治疗老年陈旧性骨质疏松椎体压缩性骨折的疗效和安全性。方法:自2004年12月至2008年6月,采用PVP治疗28例(40椎)骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折,其中男11例(14椎),女17例(26椎);年龄70～91岁,平均72岁。骨折部位T5-L5。采用PKP治疗31例(43椎),男13例(18椎),女18例(25椎);年龄70～92岁,平均74岁;骨折部位T4-L5。术后采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(visualanaloguescale,VAS)、Oswestry功能评分、后凸Cobb角、椎体前中柱的平均高度及骨水泥的渗漏率等指标来评估两组疗效。结果:两组术后VAS评分和Oswestry功能评分都有明显下降,与术前相比有统计学差异(P0.01);两组间VAS评分和Oswestry功能评分降低值无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组后凸Cobb角及椎体前中柱的平均高度与术前比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。骨水泥渗漏率,PVP组3个椎体(7.5%),PKP组2个椎体(4.7%),但均无神经症状。两组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:PVP和PKP均能有效缓解老年陈旧性骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折所引起的疼痛,改善患者的脊柱功能,并且是一种安全有效的治疗方法。     

数字减影血管造影引导下单侧穿刺椎体成形治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折

目的:探讨数字减影血管造影(digital subtraction angiography,DSA)引导下单侧椎弓根外途径精准穿刺经皮椎体成形术(percataneous vertebroplasty,PVP)或经皮椎体后凸成形术(percataneous kyphoplasty,PKP)治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折(osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures,OVCFs)的实施方法与疗效。方法:回顾性分析2015年8月至2018年12月收治的骨质疏松性压缩骨折68例,男20例,女48例,年龄为56～90(73.5±8.0)岁,双节段40例,3节段28例,共168个椎体,均采用DSA引导下经单侧椎弓根外途径精准穿刺行PVP或PKP。椎体分布:T_1-T_629椎,T_6-T_(12)89椎,L_1-L_550椎。术中观察穿刺针针尖达到椎体中线的比率,术后记录骨水泥向椎体外渗漏率,测量骨折椎体前缘和椎体中间高度,术前、术后3 d及末次随访时采用视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scale,VAS)和Oswestry指数(Oswestry Disability Index,ODI)分别对疼痛和腰椎功能进行评定。结果:68例椎体骨折均穿刺成功,术中透视穿刺针尖均达到椎体中线,骨水泥在椎体内弥散良好,左右对称分布。手术时间为35～60(41.6±3.2) min,无穿刺并发症。骨水泥每椎注射量3～5(3.6±0.5) ml。骨水泥渗漏8例,渗漏率11.76%。68例患者随访时间12～27(14.3±3.5)个月。术后3 d及末次随访时的VAS评分、ODI指数明显改善(P0.05)。术后3 d及末次随访时的椎体前缘高度和椎体中间高度明显恢复(P0.05)。结论:DSA引导下经单侧椎弓根外途径精准穿刺行PVP或PKP治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折,能够有效缓解疼痛,恢复椎体高度和脊柱功能,是一种安全、快速、有效的手术方法。     

应用Fabric pod行椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折

目的:评估应用fabric pod行椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折的临床效果。方法:2007年12月～2010年4月应用fabric pod行椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折患者13例共15个椎体,男2例,女11例;年龄56～81岁,平均72.2岁;T9 1例,T11 2例,T12 5例,L1 5例,L2 2例;椎体后壁骨折2个椎体,其余椎体后壁完整。均无脊髓和神经受损的症状和体征,疼痛节段椎体MRI脂肪抑制序列均为高信号,VAS评分为8.9±1.4分,Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)为(86.1±9.7)%,伤椎椎体前缘高度为14.50±1.34mm,伤椎后凸Cobb角度为28.50°±1.85°。随访观察患者的VAS评分、ODI及影像学改变情况。结果:患者均安全耐受手术,手术时间每节段36～58min,平均45min。未出现骨水泥渗漏,无感染、血管栓塞、脊髓或神经损伤等并发症。术后患者疼痛均明显缓解,术后24h VAS为2.1±1.3分,ODI为(30.5±7.6)%,伤椎椎体前缘高度为23.20±1.12mm,伤椎后凸Cobb角度为11.30±1.40°,与术前比较均有差异性差异(P<0.05)。随访6~22个月,平均12个月,末次随访时VAS为2.2±1.5分,ODI为(32.7±8.4)%,伤椎椎体前缘高度为22.82±0.85mm,伤椎后凸Cobb角度为12.48°±0.70°,与术前比较均有显著性差异(P<0.05),与术后24h比较均无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论:应用fabric pod行椎体后凸成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体骨折可显著缓解疼痛、有效恢复骨折椎体的高度,避免骨水泥渗漏,近期疗效满意。     

经皮椎体成形术和经皮椎体后凸成形术治疗不同压缩程度骨质疏松性椎体骨折疗效的比较

目的 比较经皮椎体成形术(PVP)和经皮椎体后凸成形术(PKP)治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折(OVCF)的疗效及不同压缩程度下对脊柱楔形角和后凸角的纠正,为不同压缩程度下最佳术式的选择提供依据. 方法 选取2004年4月至2010年1月治疗的123例OVCF患者,分别采用PVP治疗(60例)和PKP治疗(63例),两组患者基线学数据比较差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05),具有可比性.根据Genant等的方法,将所有患者压缩椎体分为轻度(A级)、中度(B级)和重度(C级)压缩,评价术前、术后视觉模拟评分(VAS)、楔形角、后凸角的改善情况及两种术式的效果.比较不同压缩等级下两种术式间VAS评分、楔形角、后凸角的改善.结果 所有患者术后VAS评分均明显改善,楔形角、后凸角均矫正,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05);两种术式对VAS评分改善比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);PKP对楔形角和后凸角的矫正效果优于PVP,差异均有统计学差异(P＜0.05).不同压缩程度下的患者两种术式间的VAS评分改善比较差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05);A、B级患者两种术式楔形角和后凸角的矫正比较差异均无统计学意义(P＞0.05);但C级患者中PKP组楔形角和后凸角的矫正均优于PVP组,差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05). 结论 PKP和PVP都能明显缓解OVCFs患者的疼痛,纠正楔形角和后凸角,恢复脊柱全长的生理曲度.但PKP能更好地纠正楔形角和后凸角,尤其是在重度压缩骨折情况下.     

Adjacent vertebral fractures after percutaneous vertebral augmentation of osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture: a comparison of balloon kyphoplasty and vertebroplasty

Introduction  

It is still controversial whether adjacent level compression fractures after balloon kyphoplasty (BK) and vertebroplasty (VP) should be regarded as the consequence of stiffness achieved by augmentation with bone cement or if the adjacent level fractures are simply the result of the natural progression of osteoporosis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the adjacent level fracture risk after BK as compared with VP and to determine the possible dominant risk factor associated with new compression fractures.     

过伸性体位复位结合PVP与PKP治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折

目的比较过伸性体位复位结合经皮椎体成形术(PVP)和经皮椎体后凸成形术(PKP)治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩性骨折(OVCF)的临床疗效。方法将81例老年OVCF患者(112椎体)根据治疗方法分为过伸性体位复位结合PVP组和PKP组。比较两组手术时间、透视次数、住院天数、治疗费用、手术前后VAS评分和ODI及椎体高度恢复情况。结果患者均获得随访,时间8~24个月。两组手术时间、透视次数、治疗费用、住院天数相比,过伸性体位复位结合PVP组均少于PKP组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组术后VAS评分、ODI及椎体高度均较术前有明显改善(P0.05);两组间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论过伸性体位复位结合PVP与PKP治疗骨质疏松性压缩性骨折疗效相当,但过伸性体位复位结合PVP较PKP手术时间更短、费用更少。     

Balloon kyphoplasty versus percutaneous vertebroplasty for treatment of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs)

Summary

The study investigated whether kyphoplasty (KP) was superior to vertebroplasty (VP) in treating patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). KP may be superior to VP for treating patients with OVCFs based on long-term VAS and ODI but not short-term VAS. Further large-scale trials are needed to verify these findings due to potential risk of selection bias.

Introduction

This study aimed to assess whether KP was superior to VP in treating patients with OVCFs.

Methods

The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases and references within articles and proceedings of major meetings were systematically searched. Eligible studies included patients with OVCFs who received either KP or VP. Standard mean differences (SMDs) and relative risks (RRs) were used as measures of efficacy and safety in a random-effects model.

Results

Eleven studies enrolling 869 patients with OVCFs were identified as eligible for final analysis. Compared with VP, KP was associated with significant improvements in long-term (SMD, ?0.70; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: ?1.30, ?0.10; P?=?0.023) visual analog scale (VAS); short-term (SMD, ?1.50; 95 % CI: ?2.94, ?0.07; P?=?0.040) and long-term (SMD, ?1.03; 95 % CI: ?1.88, ?0.18; P?=?0.017) Oswestry Disability Indexes (ODIs); short-term (SMD, ?0.74; 95 % CI: ?1.42, ?0.06; P?=?0.032) and long-term (SMD, ?0.71; 95 % CI: ?1.19, ?0.23; P?=?0.004) kyphosis angles; and vertebral body height (SMD, 1.56; 95 % CI: 0.62, 2.49; P?=?0.001) and anterior vertebral body height (SMD, 3.04; 95 % CI: 0.53, 5.56; P?=?0.018). KP was also associated with a significantly longer operation time (SMD, 0.73; 95 % CI: 0.26, 1.19; P?=?0.002) and a lower risk of cement extravasation (RR, 0.68; 95 % CI: 0.48, 0.96; P?=?0.030) compared with VP. No significant differences were found in the short-term VAS, posterior vertebral body height, and adjacent-level fractures.

Conclusion

Acknowledging some risk of selection bias, KP displayed a significantly better performance compared with VP only in one of the two primary endpoints, that is, for ODI but not for short-term VAS. Further randomized studies are required to confirm these results.

     

经皮椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松的椎体压缩性骨折

椎体压缩性骨折是骨质疏松最常见的并发症之一。它有相当的发病率，对部分患者造成持续且严重的疼痛。椎体成形术是经皮向骨折塌陷的椎体内注射骨水泥，这种方法已被用来治疗骨质疏松的椎体压缩性骨折，解除患者的疼痛。为介绍该法并探讨安全性和有效性，通过回顾多位作者的报道，我们发现椎体成形术对于疼痛的缓解率可达到67％～100％。短期的并发症主要包括骨水泥的外渗，这不但会增加疼痛，还会散热并压迫脊髓或神经根。合理的选择患者和完善的操作会减低这些并发症，因此，极少需外科减压的手术。但它的长期并发症，如骨水泥一骨接触面的异物反应，骨水泥的老化，由于应力改变而造成相邻椎体骨折的风险增加等尚未完全阐明。因此椎体成形术还需更长时间随访。     

椎体后凸成形术与椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的对比研究

随着微创脊柱外科的发展,更多的骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折(osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture,OVCF)患者接受了经皮椎体成形术与经皮椎体后凸成形术的治疗.     

椎体后凸成形术与椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折的对比研究

随着微创脊柱外科的发展,更多的骨质疏松性椎体压缩骨折(osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture,OVCF)患者接受了经皮椎体成形术与经皮椎体后凸成形术的治疗.