Safety of vertebral augmentation with cranio-caudal expansion implants in vertebral compression fractures with posterior wall protrusion

被引:6
|
作者
Meyblum, Louis [1 ]
Premat, Kevin [1 ]
Elhorany, Mahmoud [1 ]
Shotar, Eimad [1 ]
Cormier, Evelyne [1 ]
Degos, Vincent [2 ]
Pascal-Mousselard, Hugues [3 ]
Rosenberg, Sylvie [4 ]
Clarencon, Frederic [1 ]
Chiras, Jacques [1 ]
机构
[1] Sorbonne Univ, Pitie Salpetriere Charles Foix Hosp, AP HP, Dept Neuroradiol, F-75013 Paris, France
[2] Sorbonne Univ, Pitie Salpetriere Charles Foix Hosp, AP HP, Dept Anaesthesiol & Crit Care, F-75013 Paris, France
[3] Sorbonne Univ, Pitie Salpetriere Charles Foix Hosp, AP HP, Dept Orthoped Surg, F-75013 Paris, France
[4] Sorbonne Univ, Pitie Salpetriere Charles Foix Hosp, AP HP, Dept Rheumatol, F-75013 Paris, France
关键词
Spinal fractures; Vertebroplasty; Osteoporotic fractures; Back pain; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; HEIGHT RESTORATION; VERTEBROPLASTY; KYPHOPLASTY; COMPLICATIONS; REDUCTION; CLASSIFICATION; EFFICACY;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-020-06889-4
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objectives Vertebral augmentation (VA) has become routinely used in vertebral compression fractures (VCFs). VCFs are often associated with posterior wall protrusions (PWPs), which theoretically contraindicates vertebroplasty due to a higher risk of neurological complications. The latest generation of VA devices uses intravertebral cranio-caudal expandable implants to improve the correction of structural deformities but could also be used to prevent further PWP during cement injection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of VA with expandable implant for VCFs with PWP. Methods All consecutive patients treated with expandable implants were considered eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (1) non-neurological VCF, (2) considered unstable (A3-A4 in AOSpine classification), (3) significant PWP (> 2 mm), (4) back pain with a visual analogue scale (VAS) >= 4. PWPs were independently measured by two investigators; Pearson's statistics were used for interobserver reproducibility. Results Fifty-one consecutive patients, with a mean age of 75 +/- 8.3 years (range, 50-92), were included. There was a slight decrease between mean preoperative (6.7 mm +/- 2.2 mm) and postoperative (6.5 mm +/- 2.2 mm) PWP (p = 0.02), with an excellent interobserver reproducibility (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.92). A mean kyphosis reduction of 34.9% (+/- 28.4) was observed (p < 0.001). Forty-two patients (82.4%) had significant pain improvements (mean preoperative VAS = 6.9 [+/- 1.7] versus 3.1 [+/- 2.0] postoperatively [p < 0.001]). Secondary adjacent level fractures were noted in 16 patients (31.4%), with a reduction of that risk down to 18.8% if a preventive adjacent vertebroplasty was performed, without reaching the significance threshold (p = 0.14). Conclusions VA with expandable implants appeared safe for non-neurological VCFs with PWP, while allowing satisfactory pain relief.
引用
收藏
页码:5641 / 5649
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Safety of vertebral augmentation with cranio-caudal expansion implants in vertebral compression fractures with posterior wall protrusion
    Louis Meyblum
    Kévin Premat
    Mahmoud Elhorany
    Eimad Shotar
    Évelyne Cormier
    Vincent Degos
    Hugues Pascal-Mousselard
    Sylvie Rosenberg
    Frédéric Clarençon
    Jacques Chiras
    European Radiology, 2020, 30 : 5641 - 5649
  • [2] Treatment of vertebral compression fractures with the cranio-caudal expandable implant Spinejack®: Technical note and outcomes in 77 consecutive patients
    Renaud, C.
    ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH, 2015, 101 (07) : 857 - 859
  • [3] Cranio-caudal asymmetries in trabecular architecture reflect vertebral fracture patterns
    Yang, Ge
    Battie, Michele C.
    Boyd, Steven K.
    Videman, Tapio
    Wang, Yue
    BONE, 2017, 95 : 102 - 107
  • [4] Kyphoplasty: Vertebral augmentation for compression fractures
    Shedid, Daniel
    Togawa, Daisuke
    Lieberman, Isador H.
    CLINICS IN GERIATRIC MEDICINE, 2006, 22 (03) : 535 - +
  • [5] Vertebral Augmentation for Osteoporotic Compression Fractures
    Richmond, Bradford J.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL DENSITOMETRY, 2016, 19 (01) : 89 - 96
  • [6] Advances in Vertebral Augmentation Systems for Osteoporotic Vertebral Compression Fractures
    Long, Yufeng
    Yi, Weihong
    Yang, Dazhi
    PAIN RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT, 2020, 2020
  • [7] Vertebral augmentation with the SpineJack® in chronic vertebral compression fractures with major kyphosis
    Premat, Kevin
    Vande Perre, Saskia
    Cormier, Evelyne
    Shotar, Eimad
    Degos, Vincent
    Morardet, Laetitia
    Fargeot, Catherine
    Clarencon, Frederic
    Chiras, Jacques
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (12) : 4985 - 4991
  • [8] Radiologic Evaluation of Chronic Vertebral Compression Fractures and Role of Vertebral Augmentation
    Hatgis, Jesse
    Palea, Ovidiu
    Ghomri, Yashar
    Granville, Michelle
    Berti, Aldo
    Jacobson, Robert E.
    CUREUS, 2018, 10 (08):
  • [9] National trends in vertebral augmentation procedures for the treatment of vertebral compression fractures
    Lad, Shivanand P.
    Patil, Chirag G.
    Lad, Eleonora M.
    Hayden, Melanie G.
    Boakye, Maxwell
    SURGICAL NEUROLOGY, 2009, 71 (05): : 580 - 585
  • [10] Recent advances in Vertebral Augmentation for the treatment of Vertebral body compression fractures
    Wolman D.N.
    Heit J.J.
    Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports, 2017, 5 (4) : 161 - 174