{"title":"使用经皮椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松性爆裂性胸腰椎骨折安全吗?至少五年的随访研究。","authors":"Hsi-Hsien Lin, Pei-I Hung, Kuan-Jung Chen, Wei Hsiung, Ming-Chau Chang","doi":"10.1016/j.spinee.2024.10.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background context: </strong>Percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic burst fractures remains controversial. A previous study has shown that an osteoporotic burst fracture with asymptomatic spinal canal compromise is not a contraindication for percutaneous vertebroplasty.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine whether these outcomes persist over a long term, we continued to observe patients in their short-term study over a long-term period.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Prospective study.</p><p><strong>Patient sample: </strong>Patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures were classified as Dennis type I and II and AO type A1-A4, and no neurological deficits were observed.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale (VAS<sup>1</sup>) for pain were outcome measures. Radiological outcomes were vertebral body height and kyphotic angle. Complications included cement leakage, adjacent fractures, and transition to instrumented fusion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between June 2015 and December 2016, 96 patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures who met the inclusion criteria were prospectively enrolled. Preoperative, postoperative, and latest follow-up clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index and VAS. The radiological outcomes included vertebral body height, kyphotic angle, and adjacent fractures. Patients with intractable pain and neurological deficits during the follow-up were indicated for surgical treatment using decompression and instrumented fusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-one patients with osteoporotic compression fractures and 45 with osteoporotic burst fractures were included in this study. Mean follow-up duration was 74 months, and posterior vertebral body height, kyphotic wedge angle, and VAS score were not altered during the follow-up period. Three (5.9%) patients in an osteoporotic compression fracture group and three (6.7%) in a osteoporotic burst fracture group developed persistent pain, further collapse, and neurological deficits, and were indicated for surgical treatment. No significant differences were observed in the rates of adjacent fractures. Percentage of patients who required surgical treatment was not significantly different between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Osteoporotic burst fractures with asymptomatic spinal canal compromise treated with percutaneous vertebroplasty are safe and effective for pain management during long-term follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":49484,"journal":{"name":"Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is it safe to treat osteoporotic burst thoracolumbar fracture using percutaneous vertebroplasty? A minimum of 5-year follow-up study.\",\"authors\":\"Hsi-Hsien Lin, Pei-I Hung, Kuan-Jung Chen, Wei Hsiung, Ming-Chau Chang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.spinee.2024.10.019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background context: </strong>Percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic burst fractures remains controversial. A previous study has shown that an osteoporotic burst fracture with asymptomatic spinal canal compromise is not a contraindication for percutaneous vertebroplasty.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine whether these outcomes persist over a long term, we continued to observe patients in their short-term study over a long-term period.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Prospective study.</p><p><strong>Patient sample: </strong>Patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures were classified as Dennis type I and II and AO type A1-A4, and no neurological deficits were observed.</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale (VAS<sup>1</sup>) for pain were outcome measures. Radiological outcomes were vertebral body height and kyphotic angle. Complications included cement leakage, adjacent fractures, and transition to instrumented fusion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between June 2015 and December 2016, 96 patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures who met the inclusion criteria were prospectively enrolled. Preoperative, postoperative, and latest follow-up clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index and VAS. The radiological outcomes included vertebral body height, kyphotic angle, and adjacent fractures. Patients with intractable pain and neurological deficits during the follow-up were indicated for surgical treatment using decompression and instrumented fusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-one patients with osteoporotic compression fractures and 45 with osteoporotic burst fractures were included in this study. Mean follow-up duration was 74 months, and posterior vertebral body height, kyphotic wedge angle, and VAS score were not altered during the follow-up period. Three (5.9%) patients in an osteoporotic compression fracture group and three (6.7%) in a osteoporotic burst fracture group developed persistent pain, further collapse, and neurological deficits, and were indicated for surgical treatment. No significant differences were observed in the rates of adjacent fractures. Percentage of patients who required surgical treatment was not significantly different between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Osteoporotic burst fractures with asymptomatic spinal canal compromise treated with percutaneous vertebroplasty are safe and effective for pain management during long-term follow-up.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49484,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.10.019\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.10.019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景情况:经皮椎体成形术治疗骨质疏松性爆裂性骨折仍存在争议。先前的一项研究表明,骨质疏松性爆裂性骨折伴无症状的椎管损伤并不是经皮椎体成形术的禁忌症。目的:为了确定这些结果是否会长期存在,我们继续对短期研究中的患者进行长期观察:患者样本研究设计:前瞻性研究。患者样本:骨质疏松性脊椎骨折患者,分为丹尼斯I型、II型和AO A1-A4型,未观察到神经功能缺损:结果测量:Oswestry残疾指数和疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS1)为结果测量指标。放射学结果为椎体高度和椎体后凸角度。并发症包括骨水泥渗漏、邻近骨折以及向器械融合过渡:2015年6月至2016年12月,96名符合纳入标准的骨质疏松性椎体骨折患者接受了前瞻性研究。使用 Oswestry 残疾指数和 VAS 评估术前、术后和最近随访的临床结果。放射学结果包括椎体高度、畸形角和邻近骨折。随访期间出现顽固性疼痛和神经功能缺损的患者将接受减压和器械融合手术治疗:本研究共纳入 51 例骨质疏松性压缩骨折患者和 45 例骨质疏松性爆裂骨折患者。平均随访时间为 74 个月,随访期间椎体后高度、椎体楔角和 VAS 评分均无变化。骨质疏松性压缩性骨折组和骨质疏松性爆裂性骨折组分别有 3 名(5.9%)和 3 名(6.7%)患者出现持续疼痛、进一步塌陷和神经功能缺损,需要进行手术治疗。邻近骨折发生率无明显差异。需要手术治疗的患者比例在各组间无明显差异:结论:经皮椎体成形术治疗无症状椎管损伤的骨质疏松性爆裂性骨折在长期随访中对疼痛治疗安全有效。
Is it safe to treat osteoporotic burst thoracolumbar fracture using percutaneous vertebroplasty? A minimum of 5-year follow-up study.
Background context: Percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of osteoporotic burst fractures remains controversial. A previous study has shown that an osteoporotic burst fracture with asymptomatic spinal canal compromise is not a contraindication for percutaneous vertebroplasty.
Purpose: To determine whether these outcomes persist over a long term, we continued to observe patients in their short-term study over a long-term period.
Study design: Prospective study.
Patient sample: Patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures were classified as Dennis type I and II and AO type A1-A4, and no neurological deficits were observed.
Outcome measures: Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale (VAS1) for pain were outcome measures. Radiological outcomes were vertebral body height and kyphotic angle. Complications included cement leakage, adjacent fractures, and transition to instrumented fusion.
Methods: Between June 2015 and December 2016, 96 patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures who met the inclusion criteria were prospectively enrolled. Preoperative, postoperative, and latest follow-up clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index and VAS. The radiological outcomes included vertebral body height, kyphotic angle, and adjacent fractures. Patients with intractable pain and neurological deficits during the follow-up were indicated for surgical treatment using decompression and instrumented fusion.
Results: Fifty-one patients with osteoporotic compression fractures and 45 with osteoporotic burst fractures were included in this study. Mean follow-up duration was 74 months, and posterior vertebral body height, kyphotic wedge angle, and VAS score were not altered during the follow-up period. Three (5.9%) patients in an osteoporotic compression fracture group and three (6.7%) in a osteoporotic burst fracture group developed persistent pain, further collapse, and neurological deficits, and were indicated for surgical treatment. No significant differences were observed in the rates of adjacent fractures. Percentage of patients who required surgical treatment was not significantly different between the groups.
Conclusions: Osteoporotic burst fractures with asymptomatic spinal canal compromise treated with percutaneous vertebroplasty are safe and effective for pain management during long-term follow-up.
期刊介绍:
The Spine Journal, the official journal of the North American Spine Society, is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original, peer-reviewed articles on research and treatment related to the spine and spine care, including basic science and clinical investigations. It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to The Spine Journal have not been published, and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. The Spine Journal also publishes major reviews of specific topics by acknowledged authorities, technical notes, teaching editorials, and other special features, Letters to the Editor-in-Chief are encouraged.