Related Articles |
Threat issue evaluation for re-collapse of cemented vertebrae after percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) or percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP).
Int Orthop. 2018 Feb 20;:
Authors: Li YX, Guo DQ, Zhang SC, Liang, Yuan Ok, Mo GY, Li DX, Guo HZ, Tang Y, Luo PJ
Summary
PURPOSE: Re-collapse of cemented vertebrae sometimes happens after percutaneous augmentation. Nonetheless, the potential dangers nonetheless stay unclear. A number of articles have reported some potential threat components which weren’t constant or complete. This research aimed to make a retrospective evaluate on sufferers with osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture (OVCF) after percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) or percutaneous kyphoplasty (PKP) and to additional analyse the chance components for handled vertebral refracture.
METHODS: All sufferers receiving the PKP/PVP with bilateral method had been retrospectively reviewed from January 2014 to January 2016, amongst whom 230 sufferers with single stage augmentation (30 in refracture group and 200 within the non-refracture group) had been enrolled in line with inclusion standards. The next covariates had been reviewed: gender, age, top, weight, physique mass index (BMI), bone mineral density (BMD), serum bone turnover markers, surgical parameters together with method, cement quantity, anterior top, and Cobb angle restoration. Binary logistic regression evaluation was used to find out the relative threat of re-collapse of cemented vertebrae.
RESULTS: Concerning the affected person knowledge, weight, BMI, and BMD had been of statistical significance in refracture group (P?<?zero.01), amongst which solely low BMD was a threat issue to cemented vertebral re-collapse (P?=?zero.022, OR?=?four.197). In respect of surgical variables, the higher restoration of anterior top and Cobb angle was present in refracture group (P?<?zero.05), each of which could enhance the refracture threat however not be threat components (P?=?zero.065, OR?=?zero.891, and P?=?zero.937, OR?=?zero.996, respectively). Moreover, much less injected cement (three.30?±?zero.84 ml vs four.46?±?1.10 ml, P?=?zero.000, OR?=?19.433) and PKP (P?=?zero.007, OR?=?13.332) considerably boosted the potential threat of refracture (P?<?zero.001).
CONCLUSION: Sufferers with low BMD, or present process PKP, or receiving a low quantity of injected cement may need a excessive threat of re-collapse in surgical vertebrae.
PMID: 29464371 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]