Clinical effect analysis of unilateral percutaneous vertebral cement distribution in the repair of osteoporotic thoracolumbar vertebral compression fractures

被引：0
作者：
Yuntao, Liu [1 ]
Haibier, Abuduwupuer [1 ]
Kayierhan, Aiben [1 ]
Liang, Ma [1 ]
Abudukelimu, Yimuran [1 ]
Aximu, Alimujiang [1 ]
Abudurexiti, Tuerhongjiang [1 ]
Xiangyu, Meng [1 ]
机构：
[1] Xinjiang Med Univ, Afliated Hosp 6, Orthopaed Hosp Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Reg, Minimally Invas Spine Surg, 39 Wuxing Rd, Urumqi 830002, Xinjiang Uygur, Peoples R China
来源：
BMC SURGERY | 2025年 / 25卷 / 01期
关键词：
Osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture; Percutaneous vertebroplasty; Bone cement; Cement distribution; KYPHOPLASTY;
D O I：
10.1186/s12893-025-02820-0
中图分类号：
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号：
摘要：
Background Osteoporotic vertebral fractures and their complications pose increasing risks to the elderly. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF) by assessing postoperative cement distribution. Objective This study aimed to investigate the impact of cement distribution on the efficacy of vertebral compression fracture repair to provide effective preventive and therapeutic measures, prevent postoperative vertebral re-fracture, and improve surgical outcomes. Methods A total of 170 patients who underwent unilateral percutaneous vertebroplasty at our hospital from January 2020 to December 2022 were selected. Based on the postoperative X-ray cement distribution morphology, they were divided into the good distribution group (n = 87) and the poor dispersion group (n = 83). The basic information of patients, surgery-related indicators including operation time, total hospitalization costs, postoperative hospitalization time, cement injection volume, visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for back pain, vertebral height restoration rate, local kyphotic angle of the vertebra, and incidence of re-fracture of injured and adjacent vertebrae were compared between the two groups, and the follow-up results of all patients were recorded. ResultsThere were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, fracture days, menopausal age of female patients, bone density T value, medical history, smoking history, alcohol history, and surgical segments between the two groups (P > 0.05). The VAS scores for back pain at 1 month and 1 year postoperatively were significantly lower in the good distribution group than in the poor dispersion group, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). The good distribution group had a significantly lower incidence of re-fracture of injured vertebrae and overall fracture incidence than the poor dispersion group (P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in operation time, cement dosage, cement leakage, postoperative hospitalization time, adjacent vertebral fractures, postoperative vertebral height restoration rate, VAS scores for back pain at preoperative and 1 week postoperative, and ODI at preoperative, 1 week, 1 month, and 1 year postoperative between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion Compared with the poor dispersion group, patients in the cement distribution group achieved better short-term clinical efficacy, and long-term prognosis effects are still under observation. Moreover, the cement good distribution group significantly reduced the incidence of re-fracture of injured vertebrae and overall fracture incidence, thereby achieving better surgical outcomes.
引用
收藏
页数：11
相关论文
共 33 条
  • [1] Kutsal F.Y., Ergin Ergani G.O., Vertebral compression fractures: still an unpredictable aspect of osteoporosis[J], Turk J Med Sci, 51, 2, pp. 393-399, (2021)
  • [2] Imamudeen N., Basheer A., Iqbal A.M., Et al., Management of osteoporosis and spinal fractures: contemporary guidelines and evolving paradigms[J], Clin Med Res, 20, 2, pp. 95-106, (2022)
  • [3] Fang S.Y., Dai J.L., Min J.K., Et al., Analysis of risk factors related to the re-fracture of adjacent vertebral body after pkp[J], Eur J Med Res, 26, 1, (2021)
  • [4] Zhang H., Xu C., Zhang T., Et al., Does percutaneous vertebroplasty or balloon kyphoplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures increase the incidence of new vertebral fractures? A meta-analysis[J], Pain Physician, 20, 1, pp. E13-E28, (2017)
  • [5] Dai C., Liang G., Zhang Y., Et al., Risk factors of vertebral re-fracture after Pvp or Pkp for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures, especially in Eastern Asia: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J], J Orthop Surg Res, 17, 1, (2022)
  • [6] Cosman F., de Beur S.J., LeBoff M.S., Et al., Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis[J], Osteoporos Int, 25, 10, pp. 2359-2381, (2014)
  • [7] Li H.M., Zhang R.J., Gao H., Et al., New vertebral fractures after osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture between balloon kyphoplasty and nonsurgical treatment prisma[J], Med (Baltim), 97, 40, (2018)
  • [8] Buchbinder R., Johnston R.V., Rischin K.J., Et al., Percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fracture[J], Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 4, (2018)
  • [9] Yang H., Liu H., Wang S., Et al., Review of percutaneous kyphoplasty in china[J], Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 41, pp. B52-B58, (2016)
  • [10] Ding J.K., Zhao B., Zhai Y.F., Subsequent fractures after vertebroplasty in osteoporotic vertebral fractures: A meta-analysis[J], Neurosurg Rev, 45, 3, pp. 2349-2359, (2022)
1234