Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective randomized study
Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) typically involves conventional lower-viscosity cement injection via bipedicular approach. Limited evidence is available comparing the clinical outcomes and complications in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) with PVP using high-viscosity...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | BMC musculoskeletal disorders 2015-06, Vol.16 (1), p.145-145, Article 145 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 145 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 145 |
| container_title | BMC musculoskeletal disorders |
| container_volume | 16 |
| creator | Zhang, Liang Liu, Zhongjun Wang, Jingcheng Feng, Xinmin Yang, Jiandong Tao, Yuping Zhang, Shengfei |
| description | Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) typically involves conventional lower-viscosity cement injection via bipedicular approach. Limited evidence is available comparing the clinical outcomes and complications in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) with PVP using high-viscosity cement through unipedicular or bipedicular approach.
Fifty patients with OVCFs were randomly allocated into two groups adopting unipedicular or bipedicular PVP. The efficacy of unipedicular and bipedicular PVP was assessed by comparing operation time, X-ray exposure time, incidence of complications, vertebral height restoration, and improvement of the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) General Health Survey scores.
The mean operative and exposure time to X-rays in the unipedicular PVP group was less than that of the bipedicular group (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the VAS score, ODI score, SF-36 score, cement leakage rate or vertebral height restoration between the two groups (p > 0.05).
Unipedicular and bipedicular PVP are safe and effective treatments for OVCF. Compared with bipedicular PVP, unipedicular PVP entails a shorter surgical time and lower X-ray irradiation. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s12891-015-0590-6 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4465457</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A541422946</galeid><sourcerecordid>A541422946</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-87b6d7fb8dda5a04bcba5fa7eed85fcefe1cb4765444af9c6d296e98ee7a962e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptUs1qHSEUHkpL89cH6KYI3XQziXodHbsohNC0gUA3yVocPaaWmdGqc-H2GfrQ9TJJuIHiQs_5fjgevqZ5T_A5IT2_yIT2krSYdC3uJG75q-aYMEFaygR7ffA-ak5y_oUxEf1Gvm2OKMeCcImPm7_3s49gvVlGndAWUl4yGg5aEZJZip4hVKDiBYYU4qhz2SEXEgq5QIghheLNE65HZMIUE-Tsw4xc0qYstfqMNIop5Aim-C2gpGcbJv8HLMplsbuz5o3TY4Z3j_dpc3_99e7qe3v749vN1eVtaxjnpe3FwK1wQ2-t7jRmgxl057QAsH3nDDggZmCCd4wx7aThlkoOsgcQWnIKm9Pmy-obl2ECa2AudWYVk5902qmgvXqJzP6neghbxVg17UQ1-PRokMLvBXJRk88GxnHdkyK8lxtCKGWV-nGlPugRlJ9dqI5mT1eXHSOMUsl4ZZ3_h1WPhcmbMIPztf9CQFaBqfvMCdzz9ASrfTjUGg5Vw6H24VB7zYfDbz8rntKw-QcVyLwp</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1689311224</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective randomized study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><creator>Zhang, Liang ; Liu, Zhongjun ; Wang, Jingcheng ; Feng, Xinmin ; Yang, Jiandong ; Tao, Yuping ; Zhang, Shengfei</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Liang ; Liu, Zhongjun ; Wang, Jingcheng ; Feng, Xinmin ; Yang, Jiandong ; Tao, Yuping ; Zhang, Shengfei</creatorcontrib><description>Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) typically involves conventional lower-viscosity cement injection via bipedicular approach. Limited evidence is available comparing the clinical outcomes and complications in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) with PVP using high-viscosity cement through unipedicular or bipedicular approach.
Fifty patients with OVCFs were randomly allocated into two groups adopting unipedicular or bipedicular PVP. The efficacy of unipedicular and bipedicular PVP was assessed by comparing operation time, X-ray exposure time, incidence of complications, vertebral height restoration, and improvement of the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) General Health Survey scores.
The mean operative and exposure time to X-rays in the unipedicular PVP group was less than that of the bipedicular group (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the VAS score, ODI score, SF-36 score, cement leakage rate or vertebral height restoration between the two groups (p > 0.05).
Unipedicular and bipedicular PVP are safe and effective treatments for OVCF. Compared with bipedicular PVP, unipedicular PVP entails a shorter surgical time and lower X-ray irradiation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1471-2474</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-2474</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s12891-015-0590-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26071690</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged ; Bone Cements - adverse effects ; Bone Cements - therapeutic use ; Care and treatment ; China ; Disability Evaluation ; Female ; Fracture Healing ; Fractures ; Fractures, Compression - diagnostic imaging ; Fractures, Compression - physiopathology ; Fractures, Compression - surgery ; Health Status ; Humans ; Injections, Spinal ; Male ; Operative Time ; Orthopedic surgery ; Osteoporosis ; Osteoporotic Fractures - diagnostic imaging ; Osteoporotic Fractures - physiopathology ; Osteoporotic Fractures - surgery ; Pain Measurement ; Patient outcomes ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Prospective Studies ; Radiation Dosage ; Radiography ; Spinal Fractures - diagnostic imaging ; Spinal Fractures - physiopathology ; Spinal Fractures - surgery ; Surveys ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome ; Vertebroplasty - adverse effects ; Vertebroplasty - methods ; Viscosity</subject><ispartof>BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2015-06, Vol.16 (1), p.145-145, Article 145</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><rights>Zhang et al. 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-87b6d7fb8dda5a04bcba5fa7eed85fcefe1cb4765444af9c6d296e98ee7a962e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-87b6d7fb8dda5a04bcba5fa7eed85fcefe1cb4765444af9c6d296e98ee7a962e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4465457/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4465457/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26071690$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Liang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Zhongjun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jingcheng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Xinmin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jiandong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tao, Yuping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Shengfei</creatorcontrib><title>Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective randomized study</title><title>BMC musculoskeletal disorders</title><addtitle>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</addtitle><description>Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) typically involves conventional lower-viscosity cement injection via bipedicular approach. Limited evidence is available comparing the clinical outcomes and complications in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) with PVP using high-viscosity cement through unipedicular or bipedicular approach.
Fifty patients with OVCFs were randomly allocated into two groups adopting unipedicular or bipedicular PVP. The efficacy of unipedicular and bipedicular PVP was assessed by comparing operation time, X-ray exposure time, incidence of complications, vertebral height restoration, and improvement of the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) General Health Survey scores.
The mean operative and exposure time to X-rays in the unipedicular PVP group was less than that of the bipedicular group (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the VAS score, ODI score, SF-36 score, cement leakage rate or vertebral height restoration between the two groups (p > 0.05).
Unipedicular and bipedicular PVP are safe and effective treatments for OVCF. Compared with bipedicular PVP, unipedicular PVP entails a shorter surgical time and lower X-ray irradiation.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Bone Cements - adverse effects</subject><subject>Bone Cements - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>China</subject><subject>Disability Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fracture Healing</subject><subject>Fractures</subject><subject>Fractures, Compression - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Fractures, Compression - physiopathology</subject><subject>Fractures, Compression - surgery</subject><subject>Health Status</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Injections, Spinal</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Orthopedic surgery</subject><subject>Osteoporosis</subject><subject>Osteoporotic Fractures - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Osteoporotic Fractures - physiopathology</subject><subject>Osteoporotic Fractures - surgery</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Patient outcomes</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Radiation Dosage</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Spinal Fractures - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Spinal Fractures - physiopathology</subject><subject>Spinal Fractures - surgery</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Vertebroplasty - adverse effects</subject><subject>Vertebroplasty - methods</subject><subject>Viscosity</subject><issn>1471-2474</issn><issn>1471-2474</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNptUs1qHSEUHkpL89cH6KYI3XQziXodHbsohNC0gUA3yVocPaaWmdGqc-H2GfrQ9TJJuIHiQs_5fjgevqZ5T_A5IT2_yIT2krSYdC3uJG75q-aYMEFaygR7ffA-ak5y_oUxEf1Gvm2OKMeCcImPm7_3s49gvVlGndAWUl4yGg5aEZJZip4hVKDiBYYU4qhz2SEXEgq5QIghheLNE65HZMIUE-Tsw4xc0qYstfqMNIop5Aim-C2gpGcbJv8HLMplsbuz5o3TY4Z3j_dpc3_99e7qe3v749vN1eVtaxjnpe3FwK1wQ2-t7jRmgxl057QAsH3nDDggZmCCd4wx7aThlkoOsgcQWnIKm9Pmy-obl2ECa2AudWYVk5902qmgvXqJzP6neghbxVg17UQ1-PRokMLvBXJRk88GxnHdkyK8lxtCKGWV-nGlPugRlJ9dqI5mT1eXHSOMUsl4ZZ3_h1WPhcmbMIPztf9CQFaBqfvMCdzz9ASrfTjUGg5Vw6H24VB7zYfDbz8rntKw-QcVyLwp</recordid><startdate>20150614</startdate><enddate>20150614</enddate><creator>Zhang, Liang</creator><creator>Liu, Zhongjun</creator><creator>Wang, Jingcheng</creator><creator>Feng, Xinmin</creator><creator>Yang, Jiandong</creator><creator>Tao, Yuping</creator><creator>Zhang, Shengfei</creator><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150614</creationdate><title>Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective randomized study</title><author>Zhang, Liang ; Liu, Zhongjun ; Wang, Jingcheng ; Feng, Xinmin ; Yang, Jiandong ; Tao, Yuping ; Zhang, Shengfei</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-87b6d7fb8dda5a04bcba5fa7eed85fcefe1cb4765444af9c6d296e98ee7a962e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Bone Cements - adverse effects</topic><topic>Bone Cements - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>China</topic><topic>Disability Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fracture Healing</topic><topic>Fractures</topic><topic>Fractures, Compression - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Fractures, Compression - physiopathology</topic><topic>Fractures, Compression - surgery</topic><topic>Health Status</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Injections, Spinal</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Orthopedic surgery</topic><topic>Osteoporosis</topic><topic>Osteoporotic Fractures - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Osteoporotic Fractures - physiopathology</topic><topic>Osteoporotic Fractures - surgery</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Patient outcomes</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Radiation Dosage</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Spinal Fractures - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Spinal Fractures - physiopathology</topic><topic>Spinal Fractures - surgery</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Vertebroplasty - adverse effects</topic><topic>Vertebroplasty - methods</topic><topic>Viscosity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Liang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, Zhongjun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jingcheng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Feng, Xinmin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jiandong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tao, Yuping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Shengfei</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMC musculoskeletal disorders</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhang, Liang</au><au>Liu, Zhongjun</au><au>Wang, Jingcheng</au><au>Feng, Xinmin</au><au>Yang, Jiandong</au><au>Tao, Yuping</au><au>Zhang, Shengfei</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective randomized study</atitle><jtitle>BMC musculoskeletal disorders</jtitle><addtitle>BMC Musculoskelet Disord</addtitle><date>2015-06-14</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>145</spage><epage>145</epage><pages>145-145</pages><artnum>145</artnum><issn>1471-2474</issn><eissn>1471-2474</eissn><abstract>Percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) typically involves conventional lower-viscosity cement injection via bipedicular approach. Limited evidence is available comparing the clinical outcomes and complications in treating osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs) with PVP using high-viscosity cement through unipedicular or bipedicular approach.
Fifty patients with OVCFs were randomly allocated into two groups adopting unipedicular or bipedicular PVP. The efficacy of unipedicular and bipedicular PVP was assessed by comparing operation time, X-ray exposure time, incidence of complications, vertebral height restoration, and improvement of the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) General Health Survey scores.
The mean operative and exposure time to X-rays in the unipedicular PVP group was less than that of the bipedicular group (p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the VAS score, ODI score, SF-36 score, cement leakage rate or vertebral height restoration between the two groups (p > 0.05).
Unipedicular and bipedicular PVP are safe and effective treatments for OVCF. Compared with bipedicular PVP, unipedicular PVP entails a shorter surgical time and lower X-ray irradiation.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central Ltd</pub><pmid>26071690</pmid><doi>10.1186/s12891-015-0590-6</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1471-2474 |
| ispartof | BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2015-06, Vol.16 (1), p.145-145, Article 145 |
| issn | 1471-2474 1471-2474 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4465457 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals |
| subjects | Aged Bone Cements - adverse effects Bone Cements - therapeutic use Care and treatment China Disability Evaluation Female Fracture Healing Fractures Fractures, Compression - diagnostic imaging Fractures, Compression - physiopathology Fractures, Compression - surgery Health Status Humans Injections, Spinal Male Operative Time Orthopedic surgery Osteoporosis Osteoporotic Fractures - diagnostic imaging Osteoporotic Fractures - physiopathology Osteoporotic Fractures - surgery Pain Measurement Patient outcomes Postoperative Complications - etiology Prospective Studies Radiation Dosage Radiography Spinal Fractures - diagnostic imaging Spinal Fractures - physiopathology Spinal Fractures - surgery Surveys Surveys and Questionnaires Time Factors Treatment Outcome Vertebroplasty - adverse effects Vertebroplasty - methods Viscosity |
| title | Unipedicular versus bipedicular percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a prospective randomized study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T23%3A40%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Unipedicular%20versus%20bipedicular%20percutaneous%20vertebroplasty%20for%20osteoporotic%20vertebral%20compression%20fractures:%20a%20prospective%20randomized%20study&rft.jtitle=BMC%20musculoskeletal%20disorders&rft.au=Zhang,%20Liang&rft.date=2015-06-14&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=145&rft.epage=145&rft.pages=145-145&rft.artnum=145&rft.issn=1471-2474&rft.eissn=1471-2474&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s12891-015-0590-6&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA541422946%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1689311224&rft_id=info:pmid/26071690&rft_galeid=A541422946&rfr_iscdi=true |