Risk of subsequent adjacent fractures after vertebral augmentation: A systematic review

IF 0.5 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
J. M. Ortega-Zufiría, M. Sierra-Rodríguez, Y. López-Ramírez, Jorge Bernal-Piñeiro, Daniel Silva-Mascaró, M. Tamarit-Degenhardt
{"title":"Risk of subsequent adjacent fractures after vertebral augmentation: A systematic review","authors":"J. M. Ortega-Zufiría, M. Sierra-Rodríguez, Y. López-Ramírez, Jorge Bernal-Piñeiro, Daniel Silva-Mascaró, M. Tamarit-Degenhardt","doi":"10.24875/RMN.20000064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The incidence of vertebral fractures is high and the new treatment options developed in recent years represent a significant improvement, although they are not without complications. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate whether percutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) was associated with clinical and radiological subsequent adjacent fractures. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed searching on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrial.gov from the establishment of the database to January 2020. Eligible studies assessing the subsequent adjacent fractures after PVA compared with conservative treatment (CT) were incorporated. The pooled risk ratio (RR) with its 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) was used. Heterogeneity, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses were performed. Results: Twenty-four studies were considered eligible and were included finally. 20/421 patients (4.75%) had clinical subsequent adjacent fractures from the PVA group, and 25/359 patients (6.96%) had from the CT group, and 46/440 patients (10.45%) from the PVA group and 36/444 patients (8.10%) from the CT group had radiological subsequent adjacent fractures. There both had no significant difference between two groups (RR = 0.67, 95%CI: [0.38, 1.19], p = 0.17)/(RR = 1.13, 95% CI: [0.75, 1.70], p = 0.576). However, in fractured vertebrae, number in the PVA group was more than that in the CT group (RR=1.41, 95%CI: [1.03, 1.93], p = 0.03). Conclusion: Collectively, currently available literature provides data showed that PVA did not increase the incidence for subsequent adjacent fractures, no matter it was clinical or radiological fracture. However, PVA may increase the number of fractured vertebrae.","PeriodicalId":53921,"journal":{"name":"Revista Mexicana de Neurociencia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Mexicana de Neurociencia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24875/RMN.20000064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The incidence of vertebral fractures is high and the new treatment options developed in recent years represent a significant improvement, although they are not without complications. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate whether percutaneous vertebral augmentation (PVA) was associated with clinical and radiological subsequent adjacent fractures. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed searching on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrial.gov from the establishment of the database to January 2020. Eligible studies assessing the subsequent adjacent fractures after PVA compared with conservative treatment (CT) were incorporated. The pooled risk ratio (RR) with its 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) was used. Heterogeneity, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses were performed. Results: Twenty-four studies were considered eligible and were included finally. 20/421 patients (4.75%) had clinical subsequent adjacent fractures from the PVA group, and 25/359 patients (6.96%) had from the CT group, and 46/440 patients (10.45%) from the PVA group and 36/444 patients (8.10%) from the CT group had radiological subsequent adjacent fractures. There both had no significant difference between two groups (RR = 0.67, 95%CI: [0.38, 1.19], p = 0.17)/(RR = 1.13, 95% CI: [0.75, 1.70], p = 0.576). However, in fractured vertebrae, number in the PVA group was more than that in the CT group (RR=1.41, 95%CI: [1.03, 1.93], p = 0.03). Conclusion: Collectively, currently available literature provides data showed that PVA did not increase the incidence for subsequent adjacent fractures, no matter it was clinical or radiological fracture. However, PVA may increase the number of fractured vertebrae.
椎体增强术后相邻骨折的风险:一项系统综述
背景:脊椎骨折的发生率很高,近年来开发的新治疗方案有了显著的改善,尽管它们并非没有并发症。目的:本研究的目的是探讨经皮椎体隆突术(PVA)是否与临床和放射学相关。方法:从数据库建立到2020年1月,在PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane library、Google Scholar、Web of Science和ClinicalTrial.gov上进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。纳入了评估PVA与保守治疗(CT)后相邻骨折的合格研究。采用合并风险比(RR)及其95%置信区间(95%CI)。进行了异质性、敏感性和发表偏倚分析。结果:24项研究被认为是合格的,最终被纳入。PVA组20/421名患者(4.75%)有临床后续相邻骨折,CT组25/359名患者(6.96%)有,PVA组46/440名患者(10.45%)和CT组36/444名患者(8.10%)有放射学后续相邻骨折。两组之间均无显著差异(RR=0.67,95%CI:[0.381.19],p=0.17)/(RR=1.13,95%CI:[0.75,1.70],p=0.576)。然而,在骨折椎骨中,PVA组的数量多于CT组(RR=1.41,95%CI:[1.03,1.93],p=0.03),目前可用的文献提供的数据表明,PVA并没有增加随后相邻骨折的发生率,无论是临床骨折还是放射学骨折。然而,PVA可能会增加骨折椎骨的数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Revista Mexicana de Neurociencia
Revista Mexicana de Neurociencia CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
28 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信